1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D, around 17:45 on July 28, 2015, when driving Ortob (E; hereinafter “Plaintiff Ortoba”) and controlling traffic by signal apparatus, D crossing the crosswalk installed in front of the Gyeongsan commercial high school located in the direction of the pedestrian signal in the direction of the person in the direction of south, while the pedestrian signal is red signal.

B. While driving G trucks (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant-motor vehicle”), the border F discovered that D is going to cross the crosswalks by driving the G Truck and driving it in the direction of the person in the direction of the vehicle in the direction of the person in the direction of south.

C. F, while sounding a horn, he operated hand to the right side of the way, but did not stop. Accordingly, there was an accident in which the part of the Defendant’s left side of the vehicle and the part adjacent to the right side of the Plaintiff Otoba, were shocked on the above crosswalk.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). D.

D In the instant accident, D died at around 18:06 on the same day due to injury, such as ductal ductal, ductal ductal, ductal ductal ductal, etc.

(hereinafter referred to as “D”). E.

Plaintiff

A The wife, the plaintiff B, and the plaintiff C are the deceased's children, and the defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement on the defendant's vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, Gap evidence No. 11, Eul evidence No. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted 1 of the parties at the time of the accident in this case, and the accident in this case was done in a straight line so that it was possible to secure the view of the accident in this case, but the driver of the defendant vehicle was negligent in the driver of the defendant vehicle in his duty of front-time care and did not discover that the deceased would cross the crosswalk by driving the Otoba, and thus, the accident in this case.