1. The Defendant’s KRW 71,007,083 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from July 26, 2013 to January 16, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. Nonparty B driven at around 22:40 on July 26, 2013, and proceeded with one-lane of the two-lanes in front E in front of the city of Jin-si as a Jin-si from the view of the culture and arts center, Nonparty B, who driven the center line on the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s driver’s Otoba, who driven the center at the direction of Jin-si (hereinafter “the instant accident”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered an injury, such as Ein-ray 1.

B. The Defendant is an insurance company that entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to a sea-going vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 2 through 5 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, since the accident of this case occurred due to the negligence of driving a sea-going vehicle by breaking the central line, the defendant, who is the insurer, is liable to compensate for the damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the above accident.

나. 책임의 제한여부 피고는, 원고가 전조등을 비정상적으로 켠 상태에서 운전을 하고, 전방주시의무를 게을리 하였을 뿐 아니라 원고의 오토바이는 도로교통법 시행규칙 제16조 제1항 관련 [별표9] ‘차로에 따른 통행차의 기준’에 따라 2차로로 운행하여야 함에도 1차로를 진행하여 통행차로를 위반하였는데, 위와 같은 사정은 이 사건 사고 발생에 기여하였을 것이므로, 피고의 책임이 제한되어야 한다고 주장한다.

However, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone, the plaintiff saw the headlight in an abnormal manner.

It is not enough to recognize that he neglected his duty of care in advance, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition, it is common to believe that the driver of a motor vehicle operating a road with a central line along his/her own lane is able to maintain his/her own lane and trust his/her vehicle.