구상금
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the defendant's incidental appeal are all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.
purport, purport, ..
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with D with respect to the vehicle C (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) with the Plaintiff as the insured, and the Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with D with respect to the vehicle E (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Oba”).
B. At around 13:00 on March 26, 2016, F driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle and proceeded to three lanes on the 5-lane road in front of the H point located in Daegu Dong-gu G on the 5-lane road in Daegu-gu, and, at the right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.
On May 4, 2016, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 17,659,070 at the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserted that the accident in this case occurred both the negligence of Defendant Oral Ba, who neglected the duty of due care and did so, and the negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle. Since the degree of negligence of Defendant Oral Ba is 60%, the plaintiff claimed 10,595,442 won and damages for delay equivalent to 60% of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant.
In regard to this, the Defendant asserts that the instant accident occurred from the three-lanes in which the change of lanes is prohibited, to the five-lanes, due to the total negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and thus, the Plaintiff does not have the obligation to pay the indemnity to the Plaintiff.
B. The driver of any motor vehicle who intends to change course of the motor vehicle shall not change course when it is likely to impede the normal traffic of other motor vehicles running in the direction to which he/she intends to change (Article 19(3) of the Road Traffic Act). Therefore, the motor vehicle that intends to change the course at the intersection shall be the traffic of other motor vehicles running in accordance with the signals of signal apparatus.