Defendant’s KRW 161,021,760 to Plaintiff A, KRW 2,50,00 to Plaintiff B, and KRW 1,00,000 to Plaintiff C, respectively.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to the E-Poter vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On May 14, 2016, F driven the Defendant’s vehicle at around 12:44, driving the front road of H in Dong-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, with a new shotle-proof plane from the scarbing side, and the Plaintiff, who had been going earlier than the Defendant’s vehicle, was the front part of the Defendant’s bicycle’s bicycle, and thereby, the Plaintiff suffered injury, such as damage to the left-hand side of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter “the instant accident”). C.

Plaintiff

B is the husband of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff C is the father of Plaintiff A.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Eul evidence No. 2 (including branch numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Since the accident of this case occurred due to the operation of the defendant vehicle to recognize the responsibility, the plaintiff is liable to compensate the damages suffered by the plaintiffs.

B. Whether to limit liability or not, the defendant alleged that the plaintiff A was negligent in not travelling along the right side of the road at the time of the accident at the time of the accident at issue, and that it should be taken into account. However, the above assertion is rejected

3. Except as otherwise stated below, the scope of damages shall be the same as each corresponding item, and the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded.

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be governed by the discount law that deducts the interim interest at the rate of 5/12 per month.

In addition, it is rejected that the parties' arguments are not stated separately.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 6, 9, and 10, Gap evidence, and the result of the physical appraisal commission to the I hospital of this Court, the rule of experience, significant facts, and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. Personal information of Plaintiff A: at the time of birth and accident by J.