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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to Abenz Cls vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”). The Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B private string vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

B. On May 11, 2017, around 10:06, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle proceeded with one lane (on the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle) on the five-lane road in front of the Cheongak Fire Fighting Station located in Cheongcheon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and attempted to make a U-turn. However, the Defendant’s vehicle following the Plaintiff’s Mad Plaintiff’s vehicle was driven beyond the median line, and the Defendant’s vehicle following the Plaintiff’s Mad Plaintiff’s vehicle was driven on the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle, facing the upper side of the front side of

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

On June 13, 2017, the Plaintiff paid the insurance proceeds of KRW 18,695,000, total of KRW 103,200, and KRW 18,798,200 on June 27, 2017, to non-exclusive corporations, non-stock companies, as transportation and salvage expenses, to the point where the Plaintiff was discharged from Hansung Motor Co., Ltd. on the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 6, Gap evidence 3 to 5, the purpose of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the party’s assertion (i) The driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving ahead of the front line led to the U.S. driver’s fault ratio of the Defendant vehicle in the event of the occurrence of the instant accident and the expansion of damage, even though the Defendant’s vehicle was not an emergency motor vehicle due to the failure of the patient aboard at the time, causing the instant accident that occurred while driving in the middle line and driving in the speed of the emergency.

Therefore, the driver of the defendant vehicle is responsible for compensating the insured of the plaintiff vehicle for damages caused by the accident in this case, and the plaintiff is responsible for repairing the plaintiff vehicle due to the accident in this case for the insured.