1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. As seen in the “traffic accident report (on-site survey report)” attached to the facts of the basis, A, around 17:10 on December 12, 2009, driven the Plaintiff’s comprehensive car insurance B Co-section Bab (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) and proceeded the anti-high class street in the Seo-gu Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu into the inner e-mail distance from the main bank of the Gu Gyeongan Private Teaching Institutes, and had the U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S. U.S.S.A.S.A.A.R.R.R.R.R.R.R.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). [No dispute exists on the ground of recognition], each entry in Gap 2 through 6 (including paper numbers), Eul 3, 4, and 5 (including paper numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff's argument that the driver of the vehicle in this case could not safely walk because of the traffic congestion. Thus, the defendant should have prepared a safe signal system, such as installing a supplementary sign informing the time of permission for internships at the stage of the operation of the vehicle in this case. However, the above supplementary sign was not installed, a Uton sign in the signal apparatus was installed, and a Uton mark in the signal apparatus was installed in an erroneous location, and the signal conversion time was set at a narrow range of the Uton road and only one second time was set.

Accordingly, pursuant to Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act or Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, the Plaintiff is out of KRW 554,69,760 of the insurance money paid by the Plaintiff as damages, etc. to the Defendant, who is the managing body of the location of the instant accident.