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

B. Around 16:20 on August 31, 2017, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle on a two-lane road (proking two-lane road) at the seat of the children’s park located in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Seoul. At the time, there are many vehicles parked at both edge of the road at the time in the middle of the road in the middle of the middle of the center. While the Defendant’s vehicle entering the intersection where there is no traffic signal traffic signal, the Defendant’s vehicle, which was located on the left side of the road in the moving direction of the vehicle, turned down the part of the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which followed the Plaintiff’s left side of the road.

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

On September 14, 2017, the Plaintiff paid insurance money of KRW 639,20 to YEE, KRW 237,600, KRW 57,600 to C, KRW 782,300, KRW 200 to E, and KRW 1,921,50 to F, with the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the cost of parts for the instant accident.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 5, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 6, Gap evidence No. 7-1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the party’s assertion (i) and the width of the road along which the instant accident occurred is narrower than the width of the Plaintiff’s running road. As such, even though the Defendant’s driver should yield the course to the Plaintiff’s vehicle operating on a wider road, the Defendant’s driver was forced to make a full round of the Plaintiff’s vehicle by violating the duty of Jeonju, career cultivation, and safe driving. Therefore, the instant accident is entirely attributable to the Defendant’s negligence.