1. On October 2, 2014, around 17:30, the C vehicle is being operated on the road near the entrance distance of the monthly basin in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu.

1. On October 2, 2014, the Plaintiff was driving a dump truck (hereinafter “Plaintiff-Appellant”) and proceeding two lanes from the Hancheon Road in the direction of the Hancheon Road, Seoul, Nowon-gu, at the entrance of the Hancheon Road. However, the Defendant, while driving the Dalto Road in the same direction, continued to drive the Dalto Road in the same direction, led to an accident where the part of the Plaintiff’s left part is connected to the lower right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”). As the Defendant continued to drive the Dalto Road in the same direction, the two-lane road is too far as the two-lane road is turned back, and the center of the dump road is lost, and the occurrence of an accident where the part of the Plaintiff’s left part is connected to the lower right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

The Defendant sustained injury due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 3 (including paper numbers) or photographic images, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above recognition facts, the accident of this case is caused by the defendant's failure to enter the right side of the plaintiff's vehicle, which was going on the same lane as the front side of the plaintiff's vehicle, when the vehicle was stopped while driving a two-lane between the two-lanes on the side of the side of the plaintiff's vehicle, which was trying to overtake the front vehicle, and the balance is lost after the elapse, and it is reasonable to view that the accident of this case is caused by the driver's failure.

In regard to this, the defendant alleged that the accident of this case occurred due to the plaintiff's violation of the duty of pre-determination and the duty of ensuring safety distance. However, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to admit the above argument, and there is no other supporting evidence, and the above

Therefore, the accident of this case occurred by the defendant's unilateral negligence.

Therefore, it is difficult to view that the plaintiff, who is the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle, was negligent in relation to the accident of this case, there is no obligation to pay the plaintiff's compensation for the accident of this case to the defendant.

In addition, as long as the defendant contests this, he shall seek confirmation from the plaintiff.