1. The Defendant: (a) on August 26, 2013, the Plaintiff 165,524,475 won, Plaintiff B, and C respectively; and (b) on each of the said money.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) D is a cab around August 26, 2013 (hereinafter “Defendant”) around 18:35 on August 26, 2013.

(B) On the other hand, the Plaintiff Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company Company

(2) Due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff A suffered injury, such as cutting the frame, internal and floor of the pelvis and the pelvis and the pelvise of the pelvis and the pelvise of the pelvis and the pelvise of the pelvis.

3) The Plaintiff B and C are the parents of the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is the insurer who concluded the insurance contract for the Defendant’s vehicle. According to the fact of recognition of liability, the Defendant, as the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, is liable to compensate for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff B, and the Plaintiff B, and C, their parents, due to the instant accident. (b) The Plaintiff’s limitation of liability is the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, who did not look at the front of the pedestrian signal on the crosswalk, but did so. The Plaintiff was faced with the instant accident. Such negligence of the Plaintiff A contributed to the occurrence and expansion of the instant accident, and thus, should be considered in calculating the amount of damages. Such negligence of the Plaintiff was also considered in calculating the amount of damages. However, in light of the various circumstances revealed in the oral argument, the ratio of the Plaintiff’s negligence to the Defendant’s liability is 5%, and the Defendant’s liability is limited to 95% in consideration of various circumstances. [Recognition]

2. In addition to the matters stated below within the scope of liability for damages, each corresponding item of the Schedule of Calculation of Compensation for Damages shall be as follows, and in principle, 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 amount of damages shall be calculated at the rate of 5/12 per month.