The defendant.

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), the Defendant is the insurer who concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On November 24, 2017, around 15:43, the Plaintiff’s driver opened a front door of the driver’s seat to drive the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the public parking zone of Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul (hereinafter “instant road”). On the other hand, there was an accident where the Plaintiff’s vehicle is damaged due to collision with the front door of the Defendant’s vehicle driving on the instant road with the front door of the driver’s seat (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On December 1, 2017, the Plaintiff paid the insurance proceeds of KRW 4,240,480 (= KRW 3,684,480) in total as repair cost of Plaintiff’s vehicle (= KRW 556,000).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 6, Eul evidence 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The occurrence of the instant accident by the Plaintiff also contributed to the negligence of the Defendant vehicle driver who breached the duty of front-time care, and the fault ratio of the Defendant vehicle ought to be at least 30%.

B. The driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not live in the movement of another vehicle while opening the door to the driving on the road, and did not take a minimum safety measure to anticipate the opening, such as emergency flashing, brailing, etc., so the Defendant’s driver could not expect the door of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to be suddenly opened, and there was no time to avoid the collision. Therefore, the instant accident should be deemed to have occurred solely due to the total negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

3. Determination

A. The driver of any motor vehicle shall not open the door of the motor vehicle without checking the safety of the motor vehicle (Article 49(1)7 of the Road Traffic Act), the facts recognized in the above basic facts and the above.