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

B. On December 15, 2017, around 17:35, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was running along the three lanes of the four-lanes of the two-lanes to the west-dong Mancheon-dong Intersection, Busan, Busan, and the two-lanes of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes, conflict with the two-lanes of the front right side of the Defendant’s vehicle and the parts adjacent to the

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

On January 16, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,720,000 as insurance money for the repair cost of Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, 5, Eul evidence 2, 4, and 5 (including branch numbers), each statement or video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant accident occurred due to the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, such as that the Defendant’s vehicle did not turn on the direction of right in advance while changing the lane to the three lanes. The Plaintiff’s driver was obligated to pay the Plaintiff the aforementioned KRW 3,720,00 and the damages for delay thereof. Therefore, the Defendant’s instant accident is due to the Plaintiff’s obligation to keep the vehicle in front at the time of changing the lane from the four lanes to the three lanes, while the Defendant’s vehicle was changing to the three lanes, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was also caused by the change from the four lanes to the three lanes, and the Plaintiff’s negligence is at least 50% of the Plaintiff’s driver’s negligence.

B. The following circumstances, i.e., where a vehicle is intended to change the lane, the surrounding circumstances should be carefully examined so as not to impede the normal passage of other vehicles running in the same direction.