beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff A’s KRW 170,180,952, Plaintiff B, C, and D, respectively, and each of the said money on February 24, 2012.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition 1) E refers to the passenger car of Fro-car at around 18:46, Feb. 24, 2012 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).
(i)A vehicle that was driven along the three-lanes in front of the H station located in Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City along the two-lanes toward the direction of the Yongsan-dong, while trying to change the two-lanes to the three-lanes, the vehicle that was driven along the three-lanes of the two-lanes and was immediately discovered, the driver's zone was immediately returned to the port, and the roadsides located in the Central Drawing-do, which was driven along the two-lanes of the opposite lane (hereinafter referred to as "the network").
) The driver’s J Habter part of the front part of the two cargo vehicles, which caused the deceased’s death due to the her head, chest, and fluoral damage (hereinafter “instant accident”).
(2) The Plaintiff A is the deceased’s wife, Plaintiff B, C, and D, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1-1, 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiffs, who are the deceased and their bereaved family members due to the accident of this case.
C. 1) The Defendant asserts that, at the time of the occurrence of the instant accident, the Deceased and the Deceased were negligent by neglecting to conduct a defensive operation, and that the Deceased’s negligence contributed to the occurrence of the instant accident and the expansion of damages, the Defendant’s responsibility should be restricted. 2) Since it is common sense to believe that, as a driver of a vehicle operating a road on which a central line of judgment is installed along his/her lane, it would be reliance that the vehicle would be operated along his/her lane in compliance with the driver’s lane, it would be operated. Therefore, the abnormal operation of the other Party’s vehicle may be predicted.