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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to the automobile C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), with respect to the automobile D (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. Around 17:00 on April 25, 2018, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle changed the course from the first to the second one while driving the second two lanes in the nearest part of the F store E located in Ansan-si, Ansan-si., the Plaintiff’s driver shocked the part on the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle into the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

On May 28, 2018, the Plaintiff paid 1,254,000 won for the repair cost of Plaintiff’s vehicle (excluding 200,000 won for self-payment) as insurance money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts and the evidence revealed as to the cause of the claim, the accident in this case did not properly examine the movement of the plaintiff's vehicle, which is the rear-down vehicle, in the white zone where a career change is prohibited, and neglected the main fault of the defendant's vehicle that changed from the first lane to the second lane and the duty of fronting and fronting, and thus caused competition between the plaintiff's vehicle's negligence. In light of the background of the accident in this case, the background of the accident in this case, the conflict between the plaintiff and the defendant's vehicle, the degree of violation of the duty of due care of the plaintiff and the defendant's vehicle, in particular, the vehicle was inevitably changed due to the previous vehicle stopped by the defendant due to the breakdown, and the plaintiff's vehicle was expected to change the course of the defendant's vehicle, it is reasonable to view that the rate of negligence is 20% of the plaintiff's vehicle and 80% of the defendant's vehicle.

Therefore, according to subrogation by the insurer under Article 682 of the Commercial Act, the Plaintiff’s share of KRW 1,454,00 of the total amount of damages of the Plaintiff’s vehicle against the Defendant (i.e., KRW 1,254,000 of the Plaintiff’s self-paid share of KRW 200,000 paid by the Plaintiff as insurance money)