A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to the AM7 vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to the B Poter vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On November 21, 2015, around 21:15, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding two-lanes on the national highways No. C and 24 neighboring C (hereinafter “instant roads”) from the enclosed bank to the Ulsan bank.

C. Meanwhile, the defendant's vehicle entered the road of this case in a simplified stop zone located on the right side of the road of this case, and the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle, who is proceeding on the two-lane of the road of this case, has changed the course to one lane to avoid the defendant's vehicle, but is covered by the pent, pent, and typher.

From the right side to the front, even after the door, and the rear part, there was an accident that shocks the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle’s loading on the left side (hereinafter “instant accident”), and the expected collision point in consideration of traces of the Defendant’s moving-out, etc. is as follows:

After the accident of this case, the driver of the plaintiff vehicle moved the plaintiff vehicle to the side of the road of this case, and while the defendant vehicle stops the first and second lanes of the road of this case due to the accident of this case, the second accident occurred where the D New Network Truck vehicle, which is proceeding on the first lane of the road of this case, meets the right side of the vehicle of this case.

F. On December 22, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 12,150,000 insurance money in accordance with the instant accident to E, the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff 1's summary of the parties' assertion was in progress in the second-lane of the road of this case, and the plaintiff 1 was in progress prior to the point of accident of this case.