1. The Defendant’s KRW 112,86,289 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from January 21, 2013 to December 16, 2016.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) B are as follows: (a) C bus around 20:50 on January 21, 2013 (hereinafter “Defendant bus”).

A) A person driving his/her vehicle and driving his/her vehicle along the five-lane road in front of the Sinnam-si, Sungnam-si, along the same five-lanes in front of the Dong-gu, Seoul-do. A signal has changed to a vehicle stop signal, and pedestrian signal entered the crosswalk, and the Plaintiff walking along the right side of the Defendant bus fell into five-lanes to cross the road at a location less than the crosswalk, where the Plaintiff, who was walking along the right side of the crosswalk, did not discover the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff was proceeding without discovering the address, and the Plaintiff turned into the right side of the Defendant bus in front of the Plaintiff’s left part of the Defendant bus, and turned out the front side of the Defendant bus with the right side of the Defendant bus (hereinafter “instant accident”).

2) The Plaintiff suffered injury to the left-hand side part of the instant accident, etc.

3) The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement on Defendant bus. B. The recognition of liability (determination on the assertion of exemption) 1) The Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the instant accident as a mutual aid business entity of Defendant bus, except in extenuating circumstances.

2) The Defendant asserts that the instant accident was caused by the Plaintiff, who was in contact with the five-lanes of the Defendant bus at the night in Han-gu, and was in contact with the five-lanes of the instant accident, by making a mobile phone call with the Defendant bus on one-time basis, without having to cut off the Defendant bus on one-way side (the Plaintiff’s prior negligence) and getting off the instant bus from the sidewalk to the vehicular road (the Plaintiff’s prior negligence), and that the Defendant’s bus driver could not have anticipated that the Plaintiff, who was in the report, would have come to the vehicular road. As such, the Defendant could not avoid the accident (the Defendant bus driver’s non-liability

The main sentence of Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall be automobile for its own sake.