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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with respect to A private taxi (hereinafter “Plaintiff”). The Defendant is an insurer that entered into a motor vehicle insurance agreement with respect to B-learning motor vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

나. 피고 차량은 2016. 1. 10. 12:03경 인천 계양구 장제로 822 소재 계양지하차도 옆 편도 2차로 위의 도로를 계양구청사거리 방면에서 임학사거리 방면으로 1차로를 따라 진행하던 중, 롯데마트 계양점 앞 삼거리 지점에 이르러 비상등을 켠 채 서행하다가 갑자기 2차로로 차로 변경을 시도하였고, 피고 차량의 뒤에서 1차로를 따라 진행하던 원고 차량은 이에 앞서 2차로로 차로 변경을 한 후 피고 차량을 추월하기 위하여 가속을 하는 과정에서 원고 차량의 좌측 앞 범퍼 부분으로 피고 차량의 우측 차문 부분을 충격하였다

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

After paying KRW 554,280 to the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to claim the full amount of the repair cost on the premise of the Defendant’s exemption from the Defendant’s vehicle, but the Plaintiff did not comply with it. As such, the Defendant filed a request for deliberation with the Plaintiff at the “Committee for Deliberation on the Settlement of Automobile Insurance Claim” on the premise that the Defendant’s liability ratio for the instant accident is zero percent.

On August 10, 2016, the committee for deliberation on car insurance disputes decided the ratio of liability of the Plaintiff vehicle to 20% and 80% of the liability of the Defendant vehicle. Accordingly, on August 10, 2016, the Plaintiff paid 110,850 won (=54,280 won x 20% x the original unit) to the Defendant.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry and video, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred is the Defendant’s vehicle who tried to alter the lane or right-hand way without turning on the direction direction, etc.