1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with respect to Asi (hereinafter “Plaintiff taxi”).

B. On October 28, 2013, around 03:16, B, while driving the Plaintiff taxi and driving along two-lanes along the direction of the southwest-dong of Kimhae-si, Northwest-dong, Northwest-west Highway, the air conditioners (hereinafter “the instant accident location”) caused an accident to shocking the mobile concrete protection wall installed in the safety zone near the safety zone near the site due to the inflow of oil (hereinafter “the instant accident”), and due to the instant accident, C died of the Plaintiff taxi.

C. Refrigere - Busan Road Expansion Corporation was in progress at the location of the instant accident. The Defendant is the person responsible for managing the instant accident road, which is an ordering agency for the said construction, and the Ulsan Construction is the construction contractor of the said construction and the installer of the above concrete protection wall, which conflict with the Plaintiff taxi.

On December 16, 2013, the Plaintiff paid total of KRW 250,000,000 to the deceased’s heir.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The part of the concrete protective wall installed at the location of the Plaintiff’s assertion was exposed to the vehicle in a form of sludge without being treated separately, and the shock absorption facility was not installed in the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport’s installation and management guidelines for the installation of road safety facilities and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. The construction and management of the road in this case was not installed in the construction boundary facility such as signs and structures. The defects in the construction and management of the road in this case caused the instant accident and the expansion of damages, and the damage arising from the instant accident in this case’s construction and management of the road in this case’s road and the concrete protective wall in this case’s construction and the Defendant and Ulsan Construction, who are the installer of the above concrete protective wall in this case, reached 30%

Therefore, the defendant is in charge of Ulsan Construction.