1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 627,05,688; and (b) KRW 3,000,000 and each of the said money to Plaintiff A from September 22, 2012 to September 2017.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On September 22, 2012, E driving a F-city bus (hereinafter “Defendant-vehicle”) around 22:40 on September 22, 2012, and driving the red signal along the red signal of the vehicle along one-lane between the two-lane 12 complex and the lower-section 4 complex between the two-lanes, while driving the red signal of the vehicle, the Plaintiff-A driver’s Gtobane, who was directly under normal signal from the left side of the direction of the Defendant’s driving, was in front of the left side of the vehicle and the part above the left side of the Defendant vehicle.

(2) The plaintiff A suffered injury, such as an cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral Engine, etc., which had no open address in the two accidents of this case.

(3) The plaintiff C is his father and wife, and the defendant is a mutual aid business operator who entered into a mutual aid agreement with the defendant's vehicle.

[Ground for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 5, Gap 7, Eul 1 through 6, each entry and video (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above recognition of liability, the defendant is liable to compensate the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the instant accident as a mutual aid business operator for the defendant's vehicle.

(c) Limitation of liability: Provided, That the Defendant’s liability is limited to 85% in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the fact that the Plaintiff A did not wear a safety cap while driving the Oralba, and that if he paid attention as to whether the Plaintiff had first entered the intersection before entering the intersection, he would have been able to avoid the accident.

Although the Defendant asserts that Plaintiff A should also take into account the negligence of driving Otoba in the state of drinking, it is difficult to find out that Plaintiff A’s drinking in addition to the fact that Plaintiff A her drinking alcohol and driving Otoba, and that Plaintiff A contributed to the occurrence of the instant accident and the expansion of damage.