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

B. On August 25, 2018, at around 20:15, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding along one lane in front of the door of G University located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul (excluding a bus central lane). However, while continuing with the street obstacle display on the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle, the part of the Defendant’s right-hand side of the vehicle changed from three lanes to two lanes was shocked toward the right-hand side of the Plaintiff vehicle.

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

The Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 4,175,000 (Deduction of KRW 500,000 on its own charges) as insurance money until December 4, 2018, as the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including paper numbers), Gap evidence 9, 10, Eul evidence 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed based on the above basic facts and the evidence as seen earlier, the instant accident was determined that the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver constituted concurrent crimes. It is reasonable to view that the negligence ratio between the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver was 40:60.

① The point at which the instant accident occurred is three lanes, and there is a mark of street obstacles in one lane, and the point at which the indication of street obstacles is extinguished shall reach four lanes.

A vehicle that drives one lane among three lanes shall proceed along a street obstacle display and shall proceed as a two-lane or left-hand one which is a straight line between the four lanes.

Plaintiff

The vehicle is moving into one lane among the three lanes, and it is moving into two lanes among the four lanes after driving according to the road obstacle marking.

(2) The defendant vehicle shall drive two lanes among three lanes.