1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On the fourth 15th tier of the first instance judgment, a further determination shall include the following:

In addition, according to the video at the site of the accident, the Defendant: (a) the Plaintiff’s bus was suspended after shocking the Defendant’s truck beyond the median line; and (b) the accident of this case occurred due to the negligence of the Plaintiff bus that invadedd the central line; (c) even if the Defendant’s truck invadeds the central line first, the accident location of this case is anticipated to be operated rapidly, such as close to the central line or going through a part of the central line, due to the narrow road of the one-lane, where both of the two lanes are to be pushed down rapidly, and thus, if the Plaintiff bus driver, who is well aware of such circumstances, fulfilled his duty of care, such as towing and writing down the part prior to passing through the local line, then the accident of this case did not occur; and (d) the Plaintiff bus driver’s negligence should be considered at least 30%.

First of all, according to the results of the appraisal commission with respect to whether the Plaintiff bus intrudes with the central line and caused the instant accident, the said appraiser’s appraisal commission with respect to the health room and the party deliberation I does not have any direct and indirect data sufficient to readily conclude that the Defendant truck, prior to the instant accident, was influenced with the central line. Defendant truck was presumed to normally proceed along the direction of running the lane or to have proceeded with the valley line in close vicinity to the central line. If Plaintiff bus was made efforts to avoid the instant accident, it is likely to avoid the Defendant truck.