2...

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer that entered into an automobile insurance contract with the Plaintiff’s Intervenor regarding the D Motor Vehicle owned by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”).

The defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid contract for the motor vehicle E (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant vehicle").

B. Around 10:09 on December 10, 2018, the Defendant’s vehicle shocked the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle to the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which is facing the right from the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle, while going to the left at the three-distance intersection at the entrance of Seo-dong, Gwangju Metropolitan City.

C. On January 31, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,882,00,000, after deducting KRW 500,000 of the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle from the insurance money for the said accident to the Plaintiff’s Intervenor.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The left-hand left-hand vehicle of the Plaintiff caused an accident by unfairly entering the Plaintiff’s vehicle without making a temporary stop, even though the crossing is mixed with the Plaintiff’s vehicle without yielding the course to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which is the left-hand left-hand vehicle, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to claim the full amount of the insurance money paid to the Plaintiff’s Intervenor.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant’s vehicle entered the intersection and moved slowly and left left the left, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle is proceeding slowly.

Since the defendant's vehicle was shocked on the right road, the negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle is more serious.

3. Determination

가. 갑 제2, 3, 4, 7 내지 12호증(각 가지번호 포함, 이하 같다), 을 제1, 2, 3호증의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 이 사건 사고 장소의 도로는 직진 차량인 원고 차량을 기준으로 보았을 때 ‘ㅏ’자형 삼거리 교차로로서, 원고 차량 진행 도로는 폭이 6.9m, 오른쪽의 피고 차량 진행 도로는 폭이 5.8m이고 양 도로 모두 차선 구분이 되어 있지 않은 사실, 사고 당시 피고 차량...