1. It is confirmed that the Plaintiff’s liability for damages arising from the incident stated in the separate sheet against the Defendant is not existing.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 18, 2017, B driven the C urban bus (hereinafter “instant bus”) around 22:10, and driven the instant bus along the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes in front of the non-componed non-comoned sub-section of Daejeon Tae-dong, Taesung-dong, according to the scambrogate from the scamba apartment room. However, the Defendant’s head was shocked with the back wheels of the instant bus, which is located on the right-hand side of the road.

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

The plaintiff is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement for the bus of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry or video of Gap evidence 1 to 7 (including branch numbers for those with a satisfy number) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is an unforeseeable incident due to force majeure, and thus, the Plaintiff is not liable for damages to the Defendant.

B. The defendant's assertion B revealed the situation that the defendant tried not to go beyond the road, and it was late to stop immediately after the accident of this case. Since B goes beyond the road at the speed of the bus of this case, it was negligent on the part of B in relation to the accident of this case.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to compensate for the Defendant’s damage caused by the instant accident.

3. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 4's video and oral argument, the defendant's accident of this case occurred since it exceeded a road from the front section near the bus of this case to the Gap himself, Eul discontinued the bus of this case immediately after the accident of this case, and the bus of this case did not have any structural defect or functional obstacle to the bus of this case. Thus, Eul seems to have been unable to avoid the accident of this case because the defendant predicted that he would get off the bus of this case to the road of this case, and the accident of this case was caused exclusively by the defendant's negligence.

Therefore, B is the case.