1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff”).

나. 원고 차량은 2014. 1. 24. 13:55경 서울 노원구 중계로 삿갓봉근린공원사거리로 이어지는 도로를 상계역 방면에서 은행사거리 방면으로 주행하던 중 위 사거리 교차로(이하 이 사건 교차로라고 한다)에 이르러 진행방향 신호기(이하 이 사건 신호기라고 한다)의 고장으로 녹색등과 황색등이 함께 켜져 있는 상태에서 그대로 직진하다가 진행방향의 우측에서 좌측으로 신호에 따라 진행하던 B 차량(이하 피해 차량이라고 한다)을 충격하였다

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). C.

By July 24, 2014, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 15,996,120 in total, including medical expenses for victimized vehicle drivers and passengers, agreed money and repair expenses for victimized vehicle vehicles.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the accident of this case occurred between the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle and the defect in the installation or management of the signal of this case, and it is reasonable to view that the error ratio is 50:50. Thus, the defendant, who is the installer and manager of the signal of this case, is obligated to pay the plaintiff the amount equivalent to the defendant's fault ratio (=15,996,120 x 0.5 x 0.5) and the delay damages.

3. The defect in the construction or management of a public structure under Article 5 (1) of the State Compensation Act refers to a state in which the public structure is in a state of failing to have safety ordinarily prepared according to its intended purpose. Thus, it cannot be said that there is a defect in the construction or management of the public structure merely because the public structure is not in a state of completeness and has a defect in its function, and it is determined whether the public structure satisfies the above safety requirements.