1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Around 15:52 on January 25, 2019, when driving G Dump truck (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) and driving a one-lane of the shape near H in Y in Y of Echeon-si, Ein-si, the primary fact-based F conflicts with the Oral part of I driver’s license coming beyond the central line on the adjacent side of Eincheon-si, by using a dump truck (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The I died of this accident.

The plaintiffs are the inheritors of the deceased.

The defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract regarding the defendant vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 3, 5 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations by the parties concerned are sought compensation for damages under Article 10(1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act and Article 724(2) of the Commercial Act against the defendant, on the ground that I died due to the operation of the defendant vehicle.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that there is no negligence on the driver of the defendant vehicle, and that the accident in this case occurred by the whole negligence of the deceased, so it should be exempted from liability.

Since it was recognized in the basic facts that I died due to the operation of the defendant vehicle, I will look at the defense of immunity.

3. Generally, as a driver of a motor vehicle who operates a road with a median line along his/her own lane is believed to keep his/her lane and trust to drive the motor vehicle from one’s own lane. Thus, barring any special circumstance that could anticipate the abnormal operation of the other motor vehicle, the other motor vehicle has no duty of care to drive the motor vehicle by being expected to enter the median line into the center line and attaching it to the right edge of the two-lane or road.

The following circumstances are revealed by the purport of the entire arguments, namely, ① the Deceased was driving off the Otoba and going on the opposite lane of the Defendant Vehicle, and the Defendant was able to look back in the future of the Defendant Vehicle.