1. In relation to the accident described in the separate sheet, the damages liability of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is assessed.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who engages in the business of leasing sports and recreation products with the trade name “D” in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

B. On February 26, 2017, around 14:30, the Defendant lent TV (a model name: MaXER 125; hereinafter “instant private-wheeled vehicle”) to the Plaintiff and operated a course on the coast route. During the driving mode, the instant private-wheeled vehicle’s hand Hands on the right side and collisions with road rail (hereinafter “instant accident”). Accordingly, the Defendant suffered from the injury on the side side of the balance table between the right-free land and the right-hand side, and received a wing operation on March 17, 2017.

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

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s instant car was no longer than at the time of trial operation, and the accident of this case occurred due to the Defendant’s Hand operating negligence. The Plaintiff has made best efforts to prevent the occurrence of an accident during driving through sufficient safety education, such as checking the safety equipment, such as health boars, operating methods with a view to trial operation education, care for the fluor, and prevention of speed. Thus, the Plaintiff is not liable to compensate for the damages caused by the instant accident.

B. The Defendant’s instant car caused the instant accident to be plucked by a plucking, plucking, etc. during the driving of the instant car due to a breakdown in hand, and safety education was conducted by the Plaintiff on the part of the driving itself, without any content of the main driving route or the risk, and safety measures in the event of an accident or accident. As such, the Plaintiff neglected his duty of safety consideration, such as posting safety rules at the place of business or displaying safety signs on the main driving route, the Plaintiff is liable to compensate for damages, such as the Defendant’s king treatment expenses, consolation money, daily profit, etc. due to nonperformance or tort.

3. Determination

A. First of all, the instant private car is a breakdown in hand.