2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is the insurer who has concluded the automobile insurance contract with C (hereinafter “Defendant”) with respect to the automobile.

B. On November 25, 2013, around 07:01, when driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle, at the same time, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driven along the Defendant’s vehicle at the middle of the intersection to the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the 49-lane (hereinafter “instant intersection”). On the one hand, while driving along the two-lanes from the Tropical road to the Tropical road (hereinafter “instant road”), there was a traffic accident that conflicts between the two-lane side of the Plaintiff vehicle and the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle while driving the Defendant vehicle at the two-lanes of the instant intersection.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

At the time of the instant accident, it was difficult to do so before sunrise, and it was non-satisf. D.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 657,000 insurance money on May 13, 2014 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 3-1, 2-2, video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Road Traffic Act prohibits overtaking at the intersection under Article 22(3)1 of the Road Traffic Act, and emphasizes the safe driving at the intersection by stipulating the method of passage through the intersection in detail in Article 25. At the time of the instant accident, it was difficult to clearly distinguish things because she was so she was she and she was she at the time of the instant accident, and the driver of the Defendant vehicle tried to change the lane in order to avoid the vehicle parked at the intersection through the intersection after entering the instant intersection.