The defendant.

A. At around 04:47 on Nov. 18, 2009, B operated the C urban bus owned by Dowon Transport Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant bus”) with one lane prior to the 39th, Oral-si, Oral-si, Oral-si, Oral-si, Oral-si, at night at the time when the vehicle was driven by Kimpo-si at the Spo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “instant vehicle”), and the vehicle was driven by the Plaintiff’s DKapo-si (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) in the front part of the instant vehicle, without neglecting the Plaintiff’s duty of care to safely operate the instant vehicle by taking care of the movement of the instant vehicle while driving the vehicle in a safe manner. Thus, the Plaintiff failed to take part of the instant vehicle’s left-hand side by neglecting the center line by negligence exceeding a speed of 60 kilometers a speed limit.

(B) The Defendant is the insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract for the instant bus (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). According to the fact that there is no dispute over the instant bus (based on recognition), the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the instant bus insurer due to the instant accident, according to the aforementioned fact of recognition, based on the evidence No. 1, evidence No. 2-1, No. 2-2, evidence No. 4, evidence No. 6-1 through No. 18, evidence No. 1-1 through No. 19, 21, and 22-2, and the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments.

B. The limitation of liability, however, according to the evidence above, there was negligence not only where the plaintiff tried to turn left at the center line on the road where the left is prohibited, but also where the plaintiff failed to wear the safety level mark, and such negligence of the plaintiff is deemed to have caused the occurrence of the instant accident and the expansion of damage, so the amount of damages that the defendant is liable to compensate.