The Defendants jointly share KRW 1,520,301 against the Plaintiff and Defendant B with respect thereto from July 26, 2019, and Defendant C on January 2020.

1. Basic facts

A. At around 04:00 on May 14, 2019, the Plaintiff, while driving a cargo vehicle owned by the FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) at the front of E (hereinafter “the instant Plaintiff”) at the intersection at the Yangju Island, conflicting with the rocketing and other vehicles owned by the Defendant C (hereinafter “the instant Defendant”) driven by the Defendant B.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

In the instant accident, the Plaintiff calculated the medical expenses at KRW 47,370, in total, 67,670, and claimed the total medical expenses at KRW 67,690, by calculating the medical expenses at KRW 47,370. However, according to the evidence No. 3-1, the amount that the Plaintiff paid to the actual medical expenses is KRW 47,350.

B. The sale of the Plaintiff’s instant vehicle was conducted with a new vehicle after the sale.

C. Defendant B received a summary order of KRW 1 million and KRW 500,000,000,000, on the ground that the instant Defendant’s vehicle was not covered by mandatory insurance, and this summary order became final and conclusive.

F transferred to the Plaintiff the damage claim relating to the Plaintiff’s instant vehicle against the Defendants.

(The plaintiff is the representative of F). [Grounds for recognition] The plaintiff does not dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 7, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion caused the instant accident due to Defendant B’s negligence. Accordingly, the Defendant incurred damages of KRW 22 million in the vehicle value of KRW 67,690 in medical expenses, KRW 246,856 in total (i.e., average monthly income of KRW 3,744,760 in x 18 days), and thus, Defendant C, the operator of the Defendant’s vehicle, is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the Plaintiff’s damages.

B. The main point of the Defendants’ assertion is that the instant accident, even though the Defendant’s vehicle first entered the intersection in order to turn to the left while driving, the Plaintiff’s vehicle continues to proceed in a state where it did not turn to its headlight.