손해배상(기)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following order of payment shall be revoked.
1. Basic facts
A. On October 26, 2010, the Plaintiff A driven a D motorcycle owned by the Plaintiff and suffered injuries, such as a Dazyke, an an accident (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”), which goes beyond the upper part of the road (hereinafter referred to as “road to be installed by linking the roadway to the roadway to protect roads and to use them in an emergency”; hereinafter referred to as “the instant road”) on the side of the way between four lanes in the direction of the intersection in the direction of the Busan Military Police Station (hereinafter “instant road”) in front of the Busan Military Police Station (hereinafter referred to as “instant road”) and India (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).
B. Plaintiff B is the mother of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff C is the partner of Plaintiff A.
C. At the time of the instant accident, the maintenance and management of the instant road was delegated to the head of Busan Metropolitan City Mayor pursuant to Article 2(1) [Attachment Table 1] 15 of the Busan Metropolitan City Ordinance on Delegation of Administrative Affairs.
[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 through 6 (including the number with each number), the result of the appraisal conducted by the appraiser E of the first instance court, the purport of the whole argument
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiffs Gap asserted that the accident of this case was caused by the accident of this case, which occurred in the boundary of the shoulder and the surface of this case or in the part of the edge of the drainage hole installed on the shoulder of this case. Since the problem of the road structure is about the defect of the construction or preservation of public structures, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to compensate the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case as a local government managing the road of this case, which is a public structure.
B. The Defendants’ assertion is not the road management authority of the instant road, and thus are not liable for damages.
Even if this case is responsible for the road management of this case
Article 13 (6) and (6) of the Road Traffic Act.