1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings at the entries or videos described in Gap evidence 1 to 3, Gap evidence 7, 10-1, 2, and 11-1 to 17, respectively:

On March 6, 2014, around 14:45, the Plaintiff was driving a B's Dok-ro car (hereinafter referred to as "the instant car") as C'Ik-ro in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, one of the two-lanes in the 152 Jack-ro tunnels, and the two-lanes in the B's Dok-ro in the B's Hak-dong direction, which led to the driver's attention to the right side of the instant car.

B. After that, the Plaintiff continued to operate the instant vehicle without operating the vehicle, the DaM5 vehicle backer of the DaM5 vehicle, which was driven at the same lane, was driven by the first driver in the front of the instant vehicle, and the right side of the CR5 vehicle, which was driven by the direction of visibility due to its shock, was re-ted to the front side of the instant vehicle.

C. Even after that, the Plaintiff did not operate the instant vehicle and proceeded with a 600-meter speed, and was in front of the 105 Cheongcho-dong School, the Plaintiff 105 Cheongcho-dong and stopped 3 vehicles, such as Franchisa taxi, which was stopped in the signal atmosphere from three lanes to three lanes.

The Defendant is an importer of the instant car.

2. Summary of the cause of the claim;

A. The plaintiff, while shocking the pedestrian passage boundary stone, was driven by Br5 cars going ahead of the same lane due to the failure of Brackers to operate, and thereafter, even after the failure of the above tunnel, the plaintiff continued to go through Bracks and putcckes, but at a considerable rate of about 600 meters by moving away other vehicles into booms on the wind that is not completely operated, and stopped by signal signal at the vicinity of the front of the Cheongcho-dong School.