2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract for A New Zealand XD motor vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “1 vehicle”), and B is a person who has driven a motor vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “second-party motor vehicle”) at the time of the accident as follows, and the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with a company on March 24, 2012 with respect to the second-party motor vehicle owned by it for 48 months, and is a lessor who leased the said vehicle.

B, around 18:40 on August 2, 2015, driving a second-class vehicle, driving a second-class road in the vicinity of Daejeon Samsung East-dong into two lanes, and making a left-hand turn to the right-hand turn of the first-hand part of the second-class vehicle, driving the second-class vehicle into one-lane on the left-hand side of the second-class vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). From August 12, 2015 to November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 6,316,540,00,000 to the first vehicle.

[Based on the fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including the provisional number), the argument of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's argument that the accident of this case occurred due to the mistake that the second vehicle driver did not fulfill the duty of care necessary for the change of lane or left-hand turn, and thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff who acquired the right of indemnity in accordance with the insurer's subrogation provision as an operator of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act and the damages for delay.

Judgment

Article 35 of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act provides that "When a lessee operates construction machinery or a vehicle leased pursuant to this Act and causes damage to another person by an illegal act while it is being operated, the lessor shall not be deemed the person who operates the automobile for his/her own sake when Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act is applied."

Therefore, the defendant, who is the facility leasing business entity of the second vehicle, is not the operator of the second vehicle.