1. E buses owned by the Plaintiff and Frando owned by the Defendant, which were incurred in Goyang-gu D around 16:50 on June 15, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. At around 16:50 on June 15, 2018, the bus engineer G operated an E bus owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant bus”) and started from the bus stops in the Gululule bus bus bus stops, and there was an accident that shocks the back part of the Frando passenger car owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) in the atmosphere of the signal signal (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. On June 18, 2018, the Defendant visited Hwon to undergo a diagnosis of climatic and urine base for approximately two weeks of treatment. On July 28, 2018, the Defendant received an estimate of the repair cost of KRW 877,206 in total with respect to the exchange cost and repair cost for a panion, etc.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1 through 6 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's evidence 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident was caused by extremely minor contacts, and the Defendant demanded the payment of automobile repair costs and medical expenses even though there was no injury caused by the instant accident. As such, the Plaintiff sought confirmation of the absence of the obligation to pay damages to the Defendant due to the instant accident.

3. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of a pecuniary obligation for the cause of the claim, if the plaintiff, who is the debtor, has asserted to deny the fact that the cause of the claim occurred by specifying the claim first, the defendant, the creditor, bears the burden of assertion and proof as to the facts

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259 delivered on March 13, 1998, etc.). In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings and arguments as to the descriptions and images of the evidence Nos. 1 through 6 of this case, the bus manager discovered the Defendant’s vehicle parked in the air for signal signal, and operated bracs, and contacted the bus of this case even under the suspension of almost all of the part of the back part of the Defendant’s vehicle, as long as there is no movement of the Defendant vehicle.