구상금
1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with B (hereinafter “Defendant”).
B. Around 16:05 on June 20, 2017, the Defendant’s vehicle was at the front intersection of the D Rental Station located in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Jung-gu, and turned back to the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was at the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, with the front door of the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was at the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.
On July 31, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 837,900 as insurance money at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 5, Gap evidence 6, Gap evidence 7-4, Eul evidence 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The main point of the parties' assertion is that the accident of this case occurred on the road where two vehicles are divided into two lanes, considering that the accident of this case does not indicate the separation of the lanes, but there is a virtual lane, and that there is a two lanes. Although there is a vehicle bypassing from the two lanes, even though there is a vehicle bypassing from the two lanes, the vehicle by the defendant does not stop and does not operate the direction direction, etc., it is bypass from the
Since the instant accident occurred, it should be deemed that Defendant vehicle drivers had a full-time negligence, and even if it is not possible to recognize a virtual car, and even if it is an accident that occurred on a single lane, the Defendant’s vehicle was bypass and did not operate the direction direction, etc., and the instant accident occurred while the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which is the inner vehicle, was stopped, and thus, the same holds true.
In regard to this, the defendant is not in the first lane and the second lane, but in the first lane.