1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

purport, purport, and.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are parents of the network D (EE; hereinafter “the network”), and the Defendant is a person who operates a cafeteria with the trade name “G” in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu 101-1.

B. On May 3, 2013, the Deceased, employed by the Defendant on May 3, 2013, worked as the delivery source in the above G, and started to work again as the delivery source from July 25, 2013.

다. 망인은 2013. 8. 12. 12:20경 안전모를 착용하지 아니하고, 피고가 주식회사 조은리스로부터 임차한 오토바이(H)를 타고 배달을 가던 중 서울 노원구 중계동 356 삿갓봉사거리에 이르러 좌회전 신호가 켜졌음에도 신호를 위반하여 중계중학교 방면에서 당고개역 방면으로 직진한 과실로 건너편에서 좌회전 신호를 받고 유턴하던 I 운전의 소나타 차량(J)의 조수석 문짝 부분을 충돌하였다

(hereinafter “instant accident”). D.

On September 1, 2013, the deceased died of cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral Spe, etc. due to the above accident and received treatment after being transmitted to the Human University Set-off Hospital in Seoul Special Metropolitan City Nowon-gu, Nowon-gu.

E. Meanwhile, even though the Defendant employed the Deceased and had the Deceased engage in the work of delivering food until the occurrence of the instant accident, he did not provide the Deceased with any particular traffic safety education, and did not instruct the Deceased to wear the safety caps for boarding when he delivers the food to the otobane.

F. The Plaintiffs received 777,600 won in total of 71,816,470 won in total of 75,554,30 won in temporary layoff benefits of the Deceased and 2,960,230 won in medical care benefits and funeral expenses and 71,816,470 won in total.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to Articles 56(1) and 50(3) of the Road Traffic Act and Article 32(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the liability for damages arises.