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 B vehicles owned by A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is the insurer who has concluded the automobile insurance contract with respect to C vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. At around 22:00 on October 15, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven the second line road on the street in front of the Suwon Postal Control Station located in the Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Suwon-si, with the front side of the Young-gu, the front vehicle stopped over one lane and two lanes, and the front vehicle driven over the center line on the left side by avoiding the front vehicle and driving over the center. On the left side, the vehicle conflicts with the Defendant’s vehicle entering the intersection by making a turn to the left turn on the right side of the front vehicle.

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

On October 18, 2017, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 362,760 at the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The place where the accident in this case occurred is an intersection without signal, and the time of the accident is night, and the plaintiff's vehicle could not anticipate the existence of the defendant's vehicle moving ahead of it to the right side due to the prior vehicle stopping on the right side. The accident in this case is an accident caused by the unilateral negligence of the defendant's vehicle. 2) The accident in this case's assertion occurred due to the accident in this case's collision with the center line at the time of entering the first lane by avoiding the prior vehicle driven by the defendant's vehicle and stopping on the right side. Thus, the negligence ratio of the plaintiff's vehicle in this case is at least 50%.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments on the evidence before the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle’s fault ratio, are attributable to the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked.