A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to B-Vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”).

B. On June 18, 2015, at around 22:50, the Defendant driven a bicycle (hereinafter “Defendant bicycle”) and proceeded along the four-lane edges of the road near the village ginseng, which is located in the realized return dong (hereinafter “Defendant bicycle”), and the Defendant straighted in violation of the signal from the metapool lease surface to the gold elementary school room. At the same time, the Defendant driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle, driven the said three-distance from the gold elementary school to the left left-hand turn-hand turn-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and as a result, the Defendant shocked the front side of the Defendant bicycle’s bicycle’s right side on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

At the time of the instant accident, the Defendant’s bicycle did not have headlights at night, and accordingly, C could not be recognized until the Defendant’s bicycle was close to the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry and video (including branch numbers, if any) in Gap evidence 1-6, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the accident of this case occurred by the defendant's unilateral negligence, the plaintiff's liability for damages against the defendant due to the accident of this case does not exist.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that since the accident of this case conflicts between the defendant's negligence and the negligence of C who neglected the duty of prior watch, the plaintiff is responsible for compensating for the damages caused by the accident of this case.

B. (i) The driver of a vehicle driving along an intersection where traffic is controlled by signal, etc. shall comply with traffic regulations and avoid collision, except in extenuating circumstances.