The Defendants jointly set forth the Plaintiff KRW 38,030,674 as well as 5% per annum from August 29, 2018 to February 10, 2021.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff was engaged in fishing as the owner’s interest captain of the 4.93 tons of power-driven vessel E (the Plaintiff’s vessel upon the Jeju vessel’s shipment; hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s vessel”). Defendant B and C as the owner of the 15 tons of power-driven vessel F (the gender-driven vessel; hereinafter “Defendant vessel”). As the owner of the 15 tons of power-driven vessel F, Defendant D was employed as the captain of the Defendant vessel and engaged in fishing operation.

B. (1) On August 29, 2018, around 06:29, Defendant D, at the sea of the North East East East Eastern East East East East East East East East East East East Eastern, as well as at around January 8, 2018, frequently changed and sailed in order to find a place where the operation is to be carried out by using the Defendant’s vessel, and without discovering the Plaintiff’s vessel that was going into the Sungsan Port, and shocked the steering boat on the friendly side of the Plaintiff’s vessel at the top of the Defendant vessel (hereinafter “instant accident”). The instant accident was under the circumstance where the Plaintiff’s vessel was destroyed by considerable damage, such as the steering boat, etc., and was towed by the Defendant’s vessel by the Defendant vessel.

2) On October 30, 2019, Defendant D had the Jeju District Court (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul District Court 2019 High Court 431”) at the Jeju District Court on October 30, 2019, “The restricted area at the time of the instant accident is very poor weather conditions, such as the opening of the inside, and so on, the speed higher than normal speed, and at all times, by visual, hearing, and all means. The number, location, and the situation of the vessel detected by the radar, etc., shall be carefully identified and closely checked the adjacent vessels, and when the visibility is restricted, the navigation or the collision shall be done at a sufficient distance to avoid any collision with the adjacent vessels. In particular, when the visibility is restricted, the accident in this case shall be caused by negligence, which caused the Plaintiff by neglecting his duty of care to prevent any collision with the vessel and other structures, such as informing the vessel of the change of the vessel, etc., prior to the collision with another vessel.