1. The Defendant: 111,950,520 won to Plaintiff A; 108,881,742 won to Plaintiff B; and 3,000,000 won to Plaintiff C and each of the said money.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Defendant and D urban bus Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant bus”)

(2) On October 6, 2013, E entered into a mutual aid agreement on the following: (a) around 21:50 on October 6, 2013, E, while driving the Defendant bus at a speed of 60 km/h in the speed of 397 in Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and driving the Defendant bus at a speed of 41 to 40 km/h (h) in proportion to three-lanes from Samsan Sports Center, while driving the Defendant bus at a speed of 41 to h/h; and (b) in this case, E, from the right side of the running direction, was received as the front side of the Defendant bus, having opened the maid crosswalk by violating the pedestrian signal.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident.” The impact of the incident is that F was used on the end of the crosswalk and entered the lower part of the Defendant bus into the left part of the crosswalk. The E ceased to stop the Defendant bus and then looked back in front of it, and then proceeded in the future beyond the Deceased, and as a result, F came to death on the spot (hereinafter “the deceased”). The Plaintiff A and B were parents of the Deceased, and the Plaintiff C were punished by the Deceased. [The grounds for recognition are without dispute, Party A, Party A, Party B, Party B, and Party C’s punishment. (Article 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 2, and 1, 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

B. According to the above recognition of liability, the defendant is liable to compensate for the damage suffered by the deceased, etc. due to the accident in this case as a mutual aid business operator.

C. The Defendant, whose liability is limited, asserts that the violation of the signal of Defendant bus was inevitable since it was changed to yellow color around the time of entering the sand, and that the deceased’s fault who violated the signal was large.

However, there is a lack of grounds to view that the violation of the signal of Defendant bus was inevitable, and the above assertion is not accepted in that the damage was increased due to the fact that the Defendant bus proceeding without properly examining the surrounding area immediately after the first shock.

However, in violation of the above circumstances, the deceased’s fast speed signals are violated.