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

B. On July 13, 2018, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was trying to make a bypass according to the four-lanes among the four-lanes in the horizontal village located in Suwon-dong, Suwon-gu, Suwon-dong, and the same lane was parked in the same lane, and the vehicle was parked in the same lane, and the vehicle was changed to the three-lanes, while the vehicle was bypassing it, there was an accident that conflict between the Defendant’s right side side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which is giving treatment at the three-lanes of the same road (3 du wheelss of four dus), and the lower part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the lower part of the Plaintiff’s left side of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On July 31, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 845,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, excluding its own shares.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 7 evidence, Eul's 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that (i) while the plaintiff's vehicle was trying to make a bypass according to the four-lanes, the plaintiff avoided the preceding by avoiding and proceeding in the future, but there is no fact that the defendant's vehicle invadeds the three-lanes at the time. However, since the accident of this case occurred by making a bypassing at the three-lanes prohibited from the bypassing, the defendant's vehicle's negligence reaches 80% in the occurrence of the accident.

Sheb, the defendant, a large dump truck, has been inevitably changed from the three-lanes of the four-lanes in order to ensure the stable right-hand way, and the accident of this case occurred due to the conflict with the defendant's vehicle that entered the intersection by changing the lane from the four-lanes of the same direction to the three-lanes of the vehicle that entered the intersection within the intersection.