A. On December 31, 2013, around 20:39, the Plaintiff was driving the Plaintiff’s Category B NAS car and driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle along the south coast located in the 500 U.S., Changwon-si, U.S., U.S., Mapo-dong. However, the Plaintiff was damaged by protruding off a protruding light, and the left door of the said vehicle was destroyed to KRW 403,040 for repair cost.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The place where the instant accident occurred was managed by the Defendant, which was a six-lane, a road width of 23 meters, a speed of 80km/h, and a straight line with no gradient.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 3-1 to 3, the result of the verification by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Whether to recognize liability for damages in the construction, management, and preservation of a road should be determined specifically in accordance with social norms by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances such as the location of the road, road structure, traffic volume, traffic condition at the time of accident, etc., including the original purpose of use of the road, and the location, shape, etc. of physical defects. If a traffic safety defect, which is the original purpose of the road, has occurred by an act of a third party after the construction of the road, the preservation defect of the road should not be recognized simply with the fact that such a defect has been found. The existence of the defect should be determined by individually and specifically considering all the circumstances such as the structure, location, environment, and use situation of the road in question, even though the road can be restored to its original state by removing such a defect (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da15917, Sept. 27, 2002). However, the burden of proving that there was no possibility of management of the road in this case is a person occupying the road (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 236.