beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.27 2017나40817

구상금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

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

B. Around 06:40 on September 16, 2016, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven along the same lane as the vehicle that was driven by Nonparty 1, which was driven in the front line of the Southern East East East-dong Highway in Daejeon, Daejeon, changed the lane from the first lane to the second lane, and the Defendant’s vehicle that was driven in the front line of Nonparty 1 and Nonparty 1, turned down the front part of the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which was changed from the first lane to the second lane, into the front part of the Plaintiff’s left side (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) At the time, the Defendant’s vehicle was driven by Nonparty 2, who was driving a two-lane, to change the two-lanes from the first to the second two-lanes, and Nonparty 2 did not operate the direction direction, etc.

C. On November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 11,860,980 as the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as the insurance proceeds.

[Ground] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 4, 5, Eul evidence 1, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 2 to 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the plaintiff's assertion is that the accident in this case occurred after an rapid change from the first lane to the second lane without operating direction direction, etc., and the driver of the plaintiff vehicle could not have predicted the change of the vehicle in this case, and the driver of the defendant vehicle could not avoid a collision because the vehicle was operated rapidly, and thus, the driver of the defendant vehicle could not avoid a collision. Accordingly, the driver of the defendant vehicle was negligent in the transfer of the vehicle. Accordingly, the defendant's vehicle and the defendant's vehicle are driving the vehicle of the plaintiff while changing the course.