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 entered into an automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. At around 17:20 on June 1, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle shocked the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle into the left part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the two lanes from the three-lanes to the two-lanes, following the entry of the Defendant vehicle into the road in the vicinity of the access road to the intersection on the northwest-ro, 158, Seo-gu, Mapo-gu, Seoul, and the access road from the northwest-ro, and the two-lanes, following the Defendant’s vehicle’s left part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle. The Defendant’s vehicle shicked the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the one-lanes in the left part of the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “victim’s vehicle”). The Defendant’s vehicle shicked the Drick

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

Under the above insurance contract, the Plaintiff spent KRW 847,200 (excluding self-charges) and KRW 2,417,800 at the repair cost of the damaged vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Each description of Gap evidence 1 to 4, 6, 7, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 4 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that if the defendant vehicle entered the road of this case and paid little attention, the existence of the plaintiff vehicle on the right side could have been easily verified, and that the ratio of negligence to the failure to do so would be 40% even if the vehicle was yielded or driven slowly, and that the plaintiff's payment of 3,265,00 won (2,417,80 won for the repair cost of the plaintiff vehicle 847,200 won for the repair cost of the plaintiff vehicle 2,417,80 won) equivalent to the ratio of negligence of the defendant vehicle 1,306,00 won (3,265,000 won x 40%) and its delay damages.

In this regard, the defendant is the plaintiff's vehicle even though the defendant's vehicle had operated a two-lane road of this case in normal terms.