A. Around 12:50 on April 14, 2018, D operated the Plaintiff’s owned E (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) and conflict with the Defendant, the Plaintiff left the front right of the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the front side of the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City C market by negligence, which did not properly look at the front side and the right and the right of the Plaintiff’s vehicle while driving three lanes in the direction of the mountain basin in the vicinity of the mountain basin in the mountain of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City.

hereinafter referred to as "the accident of this case"

B. B. On November 18, 2018, the mutual aid business operator of the Plaintiff’s vehicle paid KRW 673,310 to the Defendant for medical expenses (the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entry of Party A1, the video of Party A2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant cannot be deemed to have suffered injury due to the accident in this case, and therefore, the defendant asserts that there was no liability for damages, and the defendant asserts that in addition to the fees already paid, damage was incurred in the future five million won of medical expenses.

3. Determination

A. The main text of Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act provides that “When a person who operates an automobile for his/her own sake dies or is injured by another person due to the operation of the automobile, he/she shall be liable for the damages therefrom.” In principle, the driver shall not be held liable for the existence of intention or negligence. However, in a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of a pecuniary obligation, if the Plaintiff, who is the debtor, has asserted to deny the fact of the occurrence of the obligation by specifying the claim first, then the Defendant, the obligee, bears the burden of asserting and proving the facts of the legal relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259, Mar. 13, 1998). This likewise applies to a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the non-existence of the liability for damages arising from a traffic accident (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da6739, 2007Da5076, Feb. 22, 192).