1. On May 31, 2016, around 10:30, there is a conflict between C buses and D Obab in front of Gyeyang-gu Incheon, Gyeyang-gu.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement with C Buses (hereinafter “Plaintiff bus”), and the Defendant is a person who drives D Obane (hereinafter “Defendant Obane”).

B. On May 31, 2016, around 10:30 on May 31, 2016, the Defendant driven Defendant Oba, driving Defendant Oba, driving the front bus exclusive lanes in the vicinity of Incheon Gyeyang-gu, Incheon, into an operational air space from the surface of the car terminal distance to the air space along the two-lanes (including bus exclusive lanes) of the five-lanes (including bus exclusive lanes). On the other hand, the Defendant invaded the front side of the Plaintiff bus of Nonparty E who continued to run along one-lane, one-lane, the bus exclusive bus exclusive for the Abama bus exclusive route.

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

The Defendant sustained injury due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 (including each number in case of additional number), Eul evidence 1 to 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion was an accident that occurred by the Defendant’s unilateral negligence, the Plaintiff is not liable for damages to the Defendant.

B. The Defendant’s argument, the driver of the Plaintiff bus, showed the appearance that Defendant Oba, who is the driver of the Plaintiff bus, runs close to the bus exclusive lane, which is one-lane from the front bank, and the road at the place where the instant accident occurred, has been displayed in a small corner, and it can be sufficiently anticipated that the said Oba may change the bus direction to the bus. As such, the instant accident is caused by concurrent negligence between the Defendant’s negligence and the violation of E’s duty of front-round navigation. The Plaintiff, the mutual aid business operator of the Plaintiff bus, is liable to compensate the Defendant for damages in proportion to the ratio of E’s negligence (minimum 40%).

3. In light of the above-mentioned facts and the overall purport of the arguments, the Plaintiff bus is driven by taking into account the following circumstances.