1. On February 15, 2016, the Defendant: (a) against Plaintiff D KRW 16,833,33; (b) against Plaintiff A, B, and C, KRW 10,222,221, respectively; and (c) against each said money.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On February 15, 2016, E operated a F Food Collection Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) around 12:50 on February 15, 2016, while driving three-lanes from three-lanes of the intersection traffic lane in the south-gu intersection traffic system at the port of port via the port of port to the Steel Corporation at the port of the racing, it did not discover a G Driving’s H bicycle (hereinafter “the instant vehicle”), which proceeds on the right side from the left side of the Defendant vehicle, and received the part of the front part of the Defendant vehicle as the front part of the instant vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (2) G (hereinafter “the deceased”) died due to brain pressure around 14:05 on February 17, 2016 while receiving treatment by suffering from the instant accident.

(3) The Plaintiff D is the deceased’s spouse, Plaintiff A, B, and C, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into a comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Gap 1, Eul 1's statements or images (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.

C. Limit of liability, however, the following circumstances that may be recognized by the aforementioned evidence, i.e., the driver E of the Defendant vehicle, at the time of the instant accident, wait for signal by stopping the vehicle at the intersection.

It seems that traffic signals have been observed by starting from the straight signal. Rather, in violation of the signals by the deceased, it appears that the accident of this case occurred while proceeding to the right-hand crossing from the left-hand side of the running direction of the Defendant vehicle in violation of the signals, and ② the stop line at the location of the Defendant vehicle is forming a somewhat open angle toward the left-hand side of the vehicle which was proceeding by the Ortoba in this case, E.