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

B. On August 3, 2017, around 14:10, the Defendant’s vehicle stopped on the one-lane of the transport remote distance (hereinafter “instant road”) from the area adjacent to the front vehicle in the area of the road adjacent to the adjacent road located in the area of the city adjacent to the city adjacent to the Si adjacent to the Si adjacent to the Si adjacent to the city adjacent to the port of the safety zone and the left-hand lane of the modern apartment located in the front apartment.

Plaintiff

The accident occurred where the front left side of the defendant vehicle and the right side of the plaintiff vehicle are faced with while the vehicle driving along the road of this case on the front side of the defendant vehicle, which affected the safety zone and entered the ticket of this case.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

On September 13, 2017, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 2,525,00 with the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 6, Eul evidence 4, each of Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the accident of this case occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle who did not fulfill his duty of care while changing the lane from the first lane of this case to the ticket of this case, the defendant is obliged to pay the amount of indemnity to the plaintiff.

The defendant asserts that the accident of this case occurred because the plaintiff's vehicle was invadedd to the safety zone to enter the driver's lane of this case. The defendant's driver of the defendant's vehicle could not predict that the vehicle will proceed through the safety zone without the center line. Thus, the accident of this case is entirely caused by the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle.

(b)Article 2 subparag. 14 and 2 of the Road Traffic Act;