1. The defendant,

A. 65,718,888 won to Plaintiff A and 5% per annum from February 25, 2018 to April 30, 2019, respectively.

1. Basic facts

A. D was sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor for ten months and two years of suspended execution through the judgment of the Incheon District Court on July 11, 2018 (the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Death)) as stated in the separate sheet (the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents). The above judgment became final and conclusive on July 19, 2018 due to a prosecutor and the Defendant’s failure to appeal.

B. Plaintiff A is the wife of E (F students, death on February 25, 2018, and male (hereinafter “the deceased”) who died from the accident listed in the above criminal facts (hereinafter “instant accident”). Plaintiff B is the deceased’s child.

C. The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to G-si that caused the instant accident (hereinafter referred to as “aggress”).

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8, each entry in evidence 16, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Occurrence of and limitation on liability for damages;

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the accident of this case is deemed to have partially caused the violation of the duty of a driver of a sea-going vehicle on the front-time basis. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the accident of this case as a mutual aid business operator of a sea-going vehicle.

B. However, in full view of the purport of the evidence presented, the following facts are found: ① the crosswalk on which the Deceased’s pedestrian signal was installed under the influence of drinking alcohol and the road section on which the distance was considerably lower; ② the center line around the road crossinged by the Deceased at the time was installed to prevent unauthorized crossing or the invasion of the center line; ③ the point at which the Deceased’s unauthorized crossing was crossing is difficult to secure the driver’s view at night; and in light of this, the Deceased’s negligence, which caused the occurrence of the instant accident, is considered to have caused the occurrence of the instant accident.

The above negligence of D and deceased, the circumstances of the instant accident, etc. are as follows.