beta
Text
1. The defendant's KRW 154,852,726 for each of the plaintiffs and 5% per annum from July 16, 2017 to April 26, 2019, respectively.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition 1) D is as follows: D around 14:17, July 16, 2017, the Egypt Royman (hereinafter “Defendant”)
(ii) a F Driving G 5 vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff vehicle”) entering the intersection to turn to the left at a speed of approximately 136.8 to 147.7 km at the speed of Si speed from the west-Eup to the west-do west-do west-do west-do west-do west-do, while driving the vehicle and driving the vehicle at the speed of approximately 136.8 to 147.7 km at the speed from the opposite side of the Defendant vehicle to turn to the left.
) The chief sentence part of the Defendant vehicle was shocked with the front part of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).
2) As a result of the instant accident, F driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and F’s wife F, who was accompanied by the steering force of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, died from the place to the heart.
(hereinafter referred to as “F and H. 3”) The Plaintiffs are the sole heir of the deceased’s children, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract against the Defendant’s vehicle. 【The ground for recognition” in the absence of any dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 13 (including the serial number, and the purport of the entire pleadings.
B. According to the above recognition of liability, as the deceased died due to the operation of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the instant accident as the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, barring special circumstances.
(c) In full view of the facts admitted in paragraph 1 of the limitation of liability and the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the following facts are recognized:
① The networkF driven the Plaintiff vehicle, while making a left-hand turn, neglected the duty to safely operate the vehicle to the extent that it does not impede the normal passage of other vehicles driving under the new subparagraph in the opposite part.
(2) The driver of a defendant vehicle shall observe the signal at the intersection, but make a turn to the left at the opposite line.