1. The defendant's KRW 15,500,00 for each of the plaintiffs and 5% per annum from February 24, 2018 to October 29, 2019, respectively.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) D is about 14:20 on February 24, 2018, Epoter truck (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”). D is about 14:20 on February 24, 2018.

the road of this case(hereinafter referred to as "the road of this case") in front of the F in the 190s.

) During the course of 38 to 49 km of the city’s speed from the area of the sloping distance to the area of the river diameter, the net G (hereinafter referred to as “the net”).

) The bicycle on the opposite bicycle line to the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s bicycle”).

2) On the ground that the Defendant’s front left-hand side of the bicycle and the Defendant’s front left-hand side of the bicycle were in conflict with each other (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) As a result, the Deceased died on February 25, 2018 on the day following the death of the deceased, which was transferred to the J Hospital located in Ysan-si by suffering from injury such as external wounds, etc. due to such injury. However, the Plaintiffs are children of the deceased, and the Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract regarding the Defendant’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-4, Eul evidence No. 1 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts, the defendant, as the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is liable for the damages suffered by the deceased and the plaintiffs as the insurer of the defendant vehicle, barring special circumstances, since the accident in this case occurred due to the operation of the defendant vehicle, and the deceased died. 2) Accordingly, the defendant asserted that the defendant could not have predicted that the plaintiff bicycle will cross the road beyond the center line because the deceased was in a direct direction towards the opposite road in the direction of the defendant vehicle driving, the driver of the defendant vehicle could not expect the plaintiff bicycle to cross the road beyond the center line, and therefore, the driver of the defendant vehicle could not avoid collision with the above bicycle, and thus, the driver of the defendant vehicle

A sprink, and the main sentence of Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall be applied to a person who operates an automobile for his own sake.