beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.
Purport of claim and appeal
(b).
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Status 1) The Plaintiff is a “Plaintiff bus” owned by A between A and A (hereinafter “Plaintiff bus”).
(2) The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with C as to the term of the contract from September 3, 2014 to September 2, 2015. (2) The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with C on D tourist buses owned by C (hereinafter “Defendant bus”).
B. Around 12:55 on April 28, 2015, F used the Plaintiff bus to operate the instant accident and as the Olympic Games, which is a four-lane exclusive road located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant road”).
2) At the time H, the I Airport bus (hereinafter “SU bus”) is called the I Airport bus (hereinafter “SU bus”) in accordance with the following three-lanes:
2) On the other hand, the J driven the instant road, which was carrying the Plaintiff bus on the same lane as that of the instant road. Meanwhile, while carrying the instant bus onto the E-brick truck (hereinafter “cargo”) from the front direction of the bus operation, the J did not properly fix the trop which was loaded on the E-brick, while carrying the trhe was carrying the trop onto the road floor.
K, who had been driving the Defendant bus after diving, was found to find the above Twit lease and turn on the emergency flashing etc. to this end, and stopped the Defendant bus over 3 and 4 lanes.
In addition, K used the above Twit Lease and moved to a four-lane.
3) The Plaintiff bus driver F erred by neglecting the duty of the front stop, thereby proceeding along the three-lanes as it is, and subsequently, changed the two-lanes to the two-lanes. On the other hand, the Plaintiff bus driver’s driver’s failure to perform the duty of the front stop, and the Defendant bus driver’s failure to proceed along the three-lanes. On the other hand, the Plaintiff bus driver’s failure to perform the duty of the front stop, and then, the Plaintiff bus driver’s failure to identify the situation and immediately changed the two-lanes. Accordingly, the Plaintiff bus driver’s failure
A. Nonparty 1, who continued to run the H driving, is Nonparty 1.