1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On June 13, 2014, at around 15:10, the Plaintiff asserted by the parties, using a bicycle-only lane for the sloping river side located in Ulsan. However, the Defendant, who was following the Plaintiff, was trying to overtake the Plaintiff’s bicycle on the left side of the Plaintiff and immediately return the bicycle to the Plaintiff’s left side of the Plaintiff’s bicycle, and the Defendant’s bicycle hand Hand was shocked on the left side of the Plaintiff’s bicycle, and thereby, the Plaintiff exceeded the same and suffered from cutting down the sloping dog.

Therefore, the defendant asserts that since the above accident occurred due to the negligence of the defendant, the defendant is obligated to pay the property damage (the lost income, the future treatment expenses, and the treatment expenses) and consolation money suffered by the plaintiff.

As to this, the defendant is overtaking the plaintiff's bicycle, and the plaintiff's bicycle speed conflicts with the defendant's bicycle rear, and the defendant is not liable for damages.

B. In light of the following facts, it is difficult to believe that the witness C’s testimony, which seems to conform to the details and part of the Plaintiff’s assertion, was based on the descriptions of evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 5, and the overall purport of the pleadings, based on the witness D’s testimony and the overall purport of the pleadings, and there is no evidence consistent with the circumstances leading to the Plaintiff’s assertion, and thus, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff

1. The witness C, the sole witness, is returning to the left side of the plaintiff, after passing the plaintiff's bicycle, to the left side of the plaintiff's bicycle.

Although Defendant bicycle rear wheels and Plaintiff’s bicycle front wheels met with one-lane, they were not earthquake. Since then, the Plaintiff testified that the Plaintiff was faced with two-lanes of the Defendant’s bicycle Hand because of late speed, and the Plaintiff exceeded the Plaintiff, there was a prior conflict between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s hand, unlike the occurrence of the witness statement and the Plaintiff’s assertion.