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

A. The Plaintiff entered into an automobile mutual aid agreement with the Plaintiff on March 17, 2016 to March 17, 2017, with respect to the F Switzerland vehicles owned by E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”).

Defendant C concluded a liability insurance contract with respect to Defendant D Co., Ltd. and their Gone Star (hereinafter “Defendant”) vehicles.

B. On October 21, 2016, H, while carrying about approximately 9.6m of the railroad rail out of the Twitler connected to the Plaintiff’s side, he tried to turn to the left at the right-hand turn at the right-hand turn in accordance with the new subparagraph, when the left-hand turn was raised from the right-hand turn at the right-hand turn at the right-hand turn, and the vehicle and loaded materials turn to the right-hand turn turn to the intersection at the right-hand turn at the right-hand turn, and the left-hand turn signal at that time was changed to the right-hand signal.

At the same time, Defendant B driving a vehicle on the part of the Defendant side, leading the said intersection to the right-side gate, in accordance with the straight distance from the straight distance from the intersection of B, and did not regard the railroad rail protruding from the turb on the part of the Plaintiff side to the front part of the Defendant side, but did not conflict with the protruding part of the railway.

(hereinafter “the instant accident”). The instant accident scene map is as shown in the attached Form, and eight persons, such as I, on board the Defendant’s side, were injured by the instant accident.

C. The Plaintiff paid 97,781,660 won in total to I, etc. in accordance with the automobile mutual aid agreement.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 10, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including additional numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred by the Defendant B’s negligence while neglecting not only the Plaintiff’s driver’s negligence but also the duty of exponing the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which led to the Defendant’s negligence.