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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

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

B. Around 08:40 on March 17, 2015, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was making a U-turn in accordance with the new subparagraph on the left-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-on the right-hand turn-hand turn-on the right-hand turn-hand turn-on the right-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, but the Defendant’s vehicle attempted to overtake the Plaintiff’

Plaintiff

The accident was caused by shocking vehicles.

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

On April 17, 2015, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,208,300 at the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence and scope of liability for damages;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred when the Defendant’s vehicle, which was going behind, attempted to overtake the Plaintiff’s vehicle beyond the median line. As such, the Defendant asserted that the instant accident was an accident by one’s fault of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the Defendant attempted to overtake the Plaintiff’s vehicle and turn to the left without departing even though the signal was changed, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle attempted to turn to the left at the latest. The Plaintiff’s failure to stop to turn to the left, and conflict with the Defendant’s vehicle by trying to turn to the left at the latest. The Plaintiff’s negligence of the Plaintiff’

B. According to the reasoning of the aforementioned evidence and arguments, the instant accident caused the primary mistake of Defendant 1 who attempted to turn to the left beyond the median line in order to overtake a preceding vehicle at the intersection.

However, even if the plaintiff's vehicle was changed to the left-hand or U-turn signal, it did not start with a considerable time, causing temporary trouble in the passage of the vehicle behind the future, and the above error of the plaintiff's vehicle was one of the causes of the accident in this case.