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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to a vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has concluded a mutual aid contract with respect to a B cross-city bus vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On February 22, 2017, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was attempting to make a right-hand at the intersection located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Seowon-si, 2126-ro 2, the Defendant’s vehicle was shocked by the Defendant’s vehicle passing through the intersection by straight lines in accordance with the straight line of the said intersection.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant traffic accident”). [Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Determination

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion lies in the occurrence of the instant traffic accident between the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver on the part of the Plaintiff, the negligence of the Defendant’s driver on the part of the Plaintiff, and the duty of safe driving.

Therefore, the Defendant, who is the mutual aid business operator of the Defendant vehicle, is obligated to pay 1,066,710 won (=3,55,700 won x 30%) and damages for delay equivalent to 30% of the fault ratio of the Defendant vehicle out of the insurance proceeds paid by the Plaintiff (the repair cost of the Plaintiff vehicle).

B. The driver of a vehicle that makes a right-hand at an intersection is obligated to make a right-hand round so as not to obstruct the vehicle that is directly driven by the ongoing signal.

On the other hand, it is difficult to expect to prepare for the driver of a vehicle who normally proceeds from a straight line with the driver “an attempt to make a sudden round through the intersection.”

In the case of the instant traffic accident, in full view of the evidence (in particular, evidence No. B No. 1) revealed earlier, the instant traffic accident occurred while the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle attempted to make a right-hand turn to the Defendant without stopping, even though the driver could have verified the Defendant’s vehicle that is directly driving under the new name, and the vehicle on the part of the Defendant is directly driving.