1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendant B Federation’s 448,864,927 won and its corresponding amount shall be from June 23, 2018 to October 11, 2019.

1. At around 23:30 on June 23, 2018, D, while driving a rocketing taxi vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant 1”) and driving a two-lane in front of the G cafeteria located in F in the wife population in the G Man-si in the direction of the two pages from the direction of the two sides, D, which crosses the right side from the left side of the Defendant 1’s vehicle to the front side of the vehicle.

(hereinafter “First Accidents”). On June 23, 2018, J driven the said two-lane of the said road (hereinafter “Defendant 2”) by driving a K rocketing taxi on June 23, 2018, while driving the said two-lane of the said road (hereinafter “the said two-lane of the said road”). H was killed in the first and second accidents, and I died in the first accidents.

The plaintiff is the spouse and the father of H and the deceased's heir as the father of H.

The defendant B Federation is the mutual aid business operator of the defendant 1 vehicle, and the defendant C Federation is the mutual aid business operator of the defendant 2 vehicle.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, or is obvious to the court, Gap’s 1 through 4, 7, 14 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul’s 1, 5, Eul’s 1 through 6, the empirical rule, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Recognition of and limitation on liability for damages;

A. Since Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 died due to the operation of Defendant 1 and Defendant 2’s vehicle, the Defendants are jointly liable for damages incurred by the network H and the Plaintiff.

(C) The Defendant Federation asserts that there was no causal link between the operation of Defendant 2 vehicle and the death of H. However, in full view of the fact that the instant 1 and 2 accidents occurred in close vicinity at time and place, and considering the station, the station, the station, the station, and the vehicle speed at the time when the secondary accident, which can be seen by the aforementioned evidence, was occurred, it is deemed that the secondary accident caused by Defendant 2’s vehicle operation, also appears to have an impact on H’s immediate death, and thus, the said assertion is rejected). Since Defendant 1 died due to Defendant 1’s vehicle operation, the Defendant Federation and the Plaintiff shall compensate for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff.