1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter “instant road”) is likely to cause a traffic accident due to the unauthorized crossing. As such, there are defects in the instant road, which are not installed despite the installation of facilities prohibiting the unauthorized crossing, and as a result, at around 22:00 on February 25, 2014, C died from the shock shock, etc. at the front part of the E-si of D Driving, which proceeds from the flow of the instant road from the agricultural underground map to the chemical shooting distance, around February 26, 2014, while crossing the instant road, around February 26, 2014.

(hereinafter “instant accident.” Therefore, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the mutual aid money as joint tortfeasor to the Plaintiff who paid the mutual aid money to C as a mutual aid manager who entered into a mutual aid agreement on the said taxi.

B. 1) Defect in the construction or management of a public structure under Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act refers to a state in which the public structure is not equipped with safety ordinarily in accordance with its intended purpose. However, the construction or management of the public structure cannot be deemed defective merely because the public structure is not in a state of completeness and has any defect in its function. In light of the overall circumstances, such as the purpose of its use, the present state of its installation and the current state of its use, etc., whether the construction manager fulfilled the duty to take protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the danger of the public structure should be determined on the basis of whether the construction manager fulfilled the duty to protect the public structure in proportion to the risk of the public structure. On the other hand, if there are the criteria for safety prescribed by statutes or internal rules of the administrative agency, it can be a single standard for determining whether the construction or management of the public structure is defective (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da23455, Nov. 9, 2006).