A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to D automobiles (hereinafter “Plaintiff”). The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to E automobiles (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On November 3, 2018, around 18:20 on November 3, 2018, the Plaintiff’s vehicle moved to the right left at the shooting distance in front of the G convalescent Hospital located in Gwangju North-gu, and there was a traffic accident in which the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle and the front front part of the Plaintiff’s driver’s seat are shocked (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”).

C. On November 15, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 218,000,000, excluding KRW 200,000, for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, Gap evidence 6, 7, Eul evidence 1 through 5, and the purport of whole pleadings]

2. Determination as to the claim for indemnity

A. The plaintiff asserted that the traffic accident in this case is an accident where the defendant's vehicle was forced to turn left the above shooting distance due to violating the duty of front-way driving and the duty of safe driving, and the vehicle was shocked by the plaintiff's vehicle. Accordingly, the defendant is obligated to pay 218,000 won to the plaintiff as insurance money. Accordingly, the defendant asserted that the traffic accident in this case should be deemed to be one's negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle that entered the two-lanes of the above shooting distance.

B. (1) According to the fact of recognition of the liability for damages, the instant traffic accident is two-lanes where the negligence of Defendant vehicle entering the same lane and the duty of safety driving, which entered the same lane, are neglected to turn left from the above shooting distance due to neglecting the duty of front-time watch and the duty of safety driving.