1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 13, 2014, at around 22:20, C driven a B-owned vehicle owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned vehicle”) and driven from the 36-lane 36 (F-dong, G-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, to the Myeong-dong screen, and stopped from the head of the front village bus stop at approximately 23.7m from the front village bus stop at the end of the route. Accordingly, the Defendant, who is a passenger, was faced with the injury of the ice screen, the upper left part of the lower part of the vehicle, the upper part of the ice frame, and the inner part of the train.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

Plaintiff

The Intervenor (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with the Plaintiff regarding the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Grounds for Recognition: The images of evidence Nos. 1 through 3-9, evidence Nos. 4, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 2, the images of evidence Nos. 3 through 5-2, and evidence Nos. 8-1 through 13, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the above facts, a driver of an urban bus shall stop at a bus stop, and even if a bus stops in a place other than a bus stop, despite the duty of care to ensure that passengers can get off the bus in a safe state, the driver neglected to stop the bus stop at a bus stop and let the defendant get off the bus to a place where ice ices are located. Since the defendant suffered injury, the plaintiff, the owner of the plaintiff vehicle, is liable to compensate the defendant for the damage suffered by the defendant due to the accident in this case.

B. However, according to each of the above evidence, since the road at the location of the accident in this case was ice, the defendant was also the defendant, and despite the fact that it could safely get off due to the bypassing of the road, ice ice scling may have been done.