1. In relation to the accident described in the attached list, the damages liability of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is assessed.

A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a business operator operating an urban bus No. B 88 (hereinafter “instant bus”).

B. On July 5, 2016, the Plaintiff’s driver C driven the instant bus at around 11:30, and stopped at the old private bus stop in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, and the Defendant boarded the bus on the bus.

Since the bus began, there was an accident that the defendant, who was not yet knobial, lost the center and exceeded the passage of the bus.

(hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. The Defendant suffered injuries, such as mercury’s salt and tension, knenee’s salt seat, etc. due to the instant accident, and was hospitalized in the E Hospital located in Kimpo-si for 10 days from July 6, 2016 to July 15, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. In light of the result of the verification of bus stops in this court and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is reasonable to deem that the bus of this case was caused by negligence of early arrival without examining whether or not the bus of this case was parked in the bus stops at the bus stops, and as a result, the bus of this case was parked in the bus stops at the bus stops, and immediately after the Defendant gets on board, the bus of this case was parked in the bus of this case without sufficient time for the Defendant to knife losses, and the vehicle of this case was moved in the body of this case, and the vehicle of this case was cut down normally while the Defendant was write down, and the driver of the bus of this case was not able to take care of whether or not the bus of this case was seated by the Defendant. In light of these circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the bus of this case was an accident of this case due to negligence by failing to take care of the seat of the Defendant.