1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Facts of recognition

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to A’s passenger vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has concluded an automobile mutual aid contract with respect to B’s bus (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).

B. On March 11, 2017, at around 18:15, the Defendant’s vehicle driven the bus bended by the two-lanes of the two-lanes around the bus stops adjacent to the bus stops in Dong-dong, Dong-si, Dong-si, through the two-lanes of the two-lanes in front of the bus stops, and the vehicle intrudes one-lanes on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving along one-lane in the same direction, and shocks on the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

On March 17, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,560,000 insurance money at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 2, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 4, plaintiff's assertion of the purport of whole pleadings

A. The Plaintiff’s Defendant’s vehicle: (a) obstructed the Plaintiff’s vehicle by breaking the instant vehicle at the two-lanes of the bend and bend; and (b) there was no possibility of avoiding the instant accident because the Plaintiff’s vehicle is normally proceeding at the first lane; and (c) the instant accident occurred due to the total negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the full amount of KRW 1,560,000 of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff with the indemnity and damages for delay.

B. The Plaintiff’s vehicle is proceeding at a rapid speed on the rear side of the Defendant’s vehicle and shocked the rear part of the Defendant’s vehicle. Thus, the instant accident is not caused by the unilateral negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, but caused the Plaintiff’s negligence in breach of the duty of safe driving, even if it was possible to prevent the instant accident by reducing the speed.

Judgment

The following circumstances, i.e., the Plaintiff’s vehicle prior to the occurrence of the instant accident, which can be seen by comprehensively taking account of the above facts and each of the above evidence.