구상금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1. Claim 1.
1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows, except for the 11th to 5th to 11th to 15 of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance, since the part of the 11th to 11th to 15 of the reasons for the 11th to 2th of the judgment is the same as the reasons for the judgment of the first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance
2. As to the remaining parts of the road (such defects as construction, management, and preservation of the road are the location of the road, the structure of the road, traffic volume, traffic conditions at the time of accidents, etc.), and the overall circumstances, such as the original purpose of use of the road, the location, shape, etc. of the original purpose of use shall be determined in accordance with ordinary social norms. In a case where a traffic safety defect, which is the original purpose of the road, is caused by a third party’s act after the construction of the road, the preservation defect of the road shall not be easily acknowledged only with the fact that such defect was found. In light of all the circumstances, such as the structure, location, environment, and use of the road, the existence of the defect shall be determined individually and specifically by examining whether it was neglected (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da15917, Sep. 27, 2002; see Article 98(1) of the Road Act, the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, in light of the pertinent road management authority’s first order to prevent the Plaintiff from violating the road management authority.