2. The costs of the review shall be borne by the plaintiff.

On April 15, 2015, the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on April 15, 2015 against the Defendant (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) relating to the first instance trial (U.S. District Court 2015Kadan207531), claiming damages for tort, on the ground that a fire (hereinafter “the instant fire”) occurred due to the occurrence of an engine error connected to the racker, which occurred in the racker’s replacement of the racker of the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “the instant vehicle”).

B. On November 21, 2017, the court of the first instance is presumed to have formed an excessive load to the engine if the driver loaded 25 tons of the cargo at the main action floor of the vehicle, and 25 tons of the cargo at the engine after the engine power was loaded onto the Young-dong Highway slope in the Crossing-gun, as a result of the fire site investigation in the fire site investigation. In addition, there is a possibility that mechanical errors (such as temporary malfunction under the engine with the engine, temporary malfunction of combined metal, loss of temporary combined power of combined metal, loss of the capacity to limit temporary mechanical devices) have occurred from the engine part, and the driver’s statement was likely to cause a fire by the excessive heat of the engine immediately after the fire site investigation. Ultimately, there is a possibility of a fire by the engine that the fire and the pipe of this case could have occurred under the direction of the machinery and the pipe of this case.