1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 20,579,174 with respect to the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from August 6, 2018 to March 18, 2020.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) Defendant B is the E-vehicle on August 6, 2018 (hereinafter “Korea-Japan”).

(i)A vehicle driven by the I driven by the J (hereinafter referred to as “victimd vehicle”) of the G G convenience store in front of the G convenience store in the F when the I driven and driven by the I while driving the G apartment in front of the G convenience store in the direction of H apartment room from the front door of the glue room to the front door of the H apartment.

2) The Plaintiff received the instant accident (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). As a result, the Plaintiff, who was accompanied by the head of the damaged vehicle’s steering force, sustained the upper left-hand upper half of the pelververververververververververververververververververver

(2) Defendant C is the owner of a sea-going vehicle, and the Intervenor joining the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance policy with respect to a sea-going vehicle.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 2-14 evidence, purport of whole pleading

B. According to the facts of recognition as the basis of liability, Defendant B driven a sea-going vehicle for itself, and Defendant C is jointly liable as the owner of a sea-going vehicle for compensation for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the instant accident under Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act.

C. Whether to limit liability or not, the Defendant asserted that “the Plaintiff did not wear the safety labelling at the time of the instant accident, in light of the fact that the Plaintiff was injured by the framework of alleys and alleys, the Plaintiff is deemed to have not worn the safety labelling at the time of the instant accident, and thus, the Defendant’s responsibility should be limited within 90%.” However, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff did not wear the safety labelling at the time of the instant accident solely with the evidence submitted in

2. In principle, the period of calculating the scope of compensation for damage shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but some days shall be calculated on a daily basis and less than the last month and less than won shall be discarded;

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.

The parties' arguments are separate.