The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Facts of recognition

On January 18, 2016, A, while driving a vehicle B (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) on January 18, 2016, around 18:16, A passed around the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-do, Seo-do, Seo-do, Seo-do, Seo-do, Seo-do, Seo-do, Seo-do, Seo-do, the west-do, Seo-do, Seo-do, and the central separation zone was shocked, and there was an accident of shocking with trees on the side of the

(A) The above accident (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). The Plaintiff was an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract (including the security for self-vehicle damage) with respect to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and paid KRW 41,295,950 to A, etc. due to the instant accident.

(No. 9, 10, 11). The Plaintiff’s assertion occurred due to the Defendant’s negligence that failed to take measures to prevent accidents that remove the articles left on the road, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff who exercises the insurer’s subrogation right for damages.

Judgment

The defects in the construction, management, and preservation of a road shall be determined specifically according to social norms by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances such as the location of the road, structure of the road, traffic volume, traffic conditions in the event of an accident, etc., including the original purpose of the road, and the location, shape, etc. of a physical defect. If a traffic safety defect, which is the original purpose of the road, has occurred by an act of a third party after the construction of the road, the mere fact that such a defect is a defect, shall not be recognized for the preservation of the road, and the existence or absence of such a defect shall be determined by comprehensively considering all the circumstances such as the structure, location, environment, and use situation of the road concerned, even though the road can be restored to its original state by removing

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da15917 delivered on September 27, 2002, see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da15917 delivered on September 27, 200).