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 entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the B Carren vehicles owned by A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to C rocketing vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 5, 2015, around 07:52, the Defendant’s vehicle conflict with the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was sent directly in accordance with the straight lines depending on the two-lanes between the two-lanes of the 3-lane distance intersection located in the Jinnish-dong, Chungcheongnam-do, the wife population, when making a left-hand turn to the green signal according to one-lanes among the three-lanes located in the Cinish-dong, Samdo-dong.

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

By November 18, 2015, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 5,006,300 at the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Gap evidence No. 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the accident in this case occurred due to the unilateral negligence of the defendant vehicle that attempted to turn to the left at a non-protective zone without examining the right and the right and the right and the left and the defendant, who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is obliged to pay to the plaintiff KRW 5,006,300 of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff as the reimbursement amount.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case, along with the negligence of the driver of the vehicle of this case, is caused by the negligence of the driver of the vehicle of this case who has believed only the direct promotion signal at the front side and right side without sufficiently examining the traffic situation at the left and right side in the non-protective zone, and thus, the negligence of the plaintiff vehicle should be deemed to be at least 40%.

(b) a vehicle that wishes to turn to the left in the area where judgment is taken or the left turn is not obstructed by the passage of a straighted vehicle while cautioning to the vehicle from the opposite direction in accordance with the vehicle progress signal;