1. The Defendant’s KRW 75,076,704 as well as 5% per annum from March 14, 2014 to May 13, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition were around 15:20 on March 14, 2014, the Plaintiff was driving a bicycle on the part adjacent to the right side of the bus of this case while entering the bus stop, which was driven by the city bus of this case (hereinafter “the bus of this case”) in the middle of the city of Sung-gu, Seo-gu, Sung-gu, Sung-gu, Sung-si, by moving the bicycle to the corner of a valley square. However, the driver’s name influor, who was directly driving the city bus of this case (hereinafter “the bus of this case”), was not found any bicycle of the Plaintiff who was driving at the right side of the bus of this case while entering the bus stop, was shocking the Plaintiff’s bicycle on the left side of the bus of this case and let the Plaintiff go beyond the road.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). As a result, the Plaintiff suffered bodily injury, such as two so-called “the instant accident” and “aggravating ductal ductal ductal ductal ductal ductal ductal ductal ductal, focused ductal ductal ductal ductal ductal ductal du

The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement with the owner of the instant bus.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry and video of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is responsible for compensating the plaintiff for the damages caused by the accident of this case.

The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff continued on the rear side of the bus of this case and moved along four lanes, and the rear part of the bus of this case, which was proceeding on the front side of the bus of this case, was shocked by the Plaintiff’s bicycle. The Defendant asserted that the bus driver of this case should be exempted from liability because there was no duty of due care to drive, in such a case.

However, the circumstances of the instant accident recognized by integrating the evidence submitted during the pleadings of the instant case are as seen earlier, and there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff’s bicycle was shocked by the bus of this case, as alleged by the Defendant.

Therefore, it is true.