B On March 8, 2015, at around 10:05, driving D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) and contacted Defendant E (hereinafter “Defendant”) with the side of the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”) who was making a right turn to the left at the intersection adjacent to the intersection of the Busan Young-gu, Young-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, which was located in the middle of the right turn to the left.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The Plaintiff asserted and determined that the instant accident was shocked by the Defendant’s vehicle that was left left pursuant to the normal signals, and that the Defendant’s negligence was at least 90%, and that the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle would not exceed one million won in light of the parts and degree of damage. As such, the Plaintiff’s damage liability against the Defendant did not exceed 100,000 won.

If the plaintiff, who is the debtor in a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of the obligation, asserts that the fact that the cause of the obligation occurred by specifying the claim first, the defendant, the creditor, bears the burden of proving the elements of the legal relationship. The evidence submitted by the defendant alone is difficult to recognize the negligence of the plaintiff vehicle and the defendant's amount of damages exceeding the part of the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence, so it is so decided as per Disposition