2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is an insurance company that entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance policy with respect to Nonparty B and C Freight Vehicles owned by it (hereinafter “Plaintiff”).

B. On July 11, 2014, at around 22:00, the Defendant driven a Dblade vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”) and proceeded into Kimcheon-section in accordance with one lane of the road adjacent to the Flutere Cable E in the Gyeongbuk-gun, the Defendant received the rear part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle of Nonparty G driving, who was parked in one lane due to Mauk-ro, and was in front of the Defendant vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as the "traffic accident in this case"). . [Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 1 through 2 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff alleged that "the accident of this case is impossible to operate the plaintiff's vehicle by free trade practice, because the above G stops the plaintiff's vehicle, turns on headlight and emergency, etc. at a point of 100 meters after the scene of the accident, while taking safety measures, the defendant continued to drive the plaintiff's vehicle in the speed, and there is no liability for damages against the defendant since the defendant's total negligence occurred," and the defendant alleged to the purport that "the driver's negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle is involved in the accident."

B. According to the above facts of recognition and the evidence revealed earlier, the instant traffic accident occurred when the Plaintiff’s vehicle was parked in the first way of the national highways with a speed of 80 km at night, resulting in the Plaintiff’s vehicle being stopped by giving a survey of his own weight, and the Defendant’s vehicle, who was behind the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was stopped by taking the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the entire purport of the oral argument is added to the statement No. 4, the G, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was on emergency, and the signal was sent on the rear side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.