Text
1. The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to A MT Cargo Vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer that entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B ST Vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicles”).
나. C은 2013. 6. 22. 18:00경 원고 차량을 운전하여 용인시 처인구 D에 있는 E 앞 편도 1차로의 일방통행로를 진행하다가 우측 E 앞 공터로 진입하기 위해 비상등을 켜고 일시 정차하였다가 핸들을 꺽어 우회전하던 중 때마침 원고 차량이 정차한 것을 보고 원고 차량 우측으로 원고 차량을 추월하려던 피고 차량의 좌측 뒷문짝 옆면 부분을 원고 차량 조수석 앞범퍼 우측면으로 충격하는 사고(이하 ‘이 사건 사고’라 한다)가 발생하였다.
C. On December 13, 2013, the Defendant paid KRW 904,310 of the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle due to the instant accident, and filed a petition with the Plaintiff for deliberation by the Deliberative Committee on the Settlement of Automobile Insurance Claim (hereinafter “Deliberative Committee”) for the payment of KRW 813,879, which is 90% of the said amount. The Deliberative Committee set the Plaintiff’s negligence as 80% on March 24, 2014 and decided to deliberate and coordinate on the Plaintiff’s fault as 80%, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 723,448, which is equivalent to the said negligence ratio (= 904,310 x 0.8) to the Defendant until April 8, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 9, Eul evidence 11 (including each number in the case of provisional number), Eul evidence 1 through 6 (including each number in the case of provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings, or the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not attempt to make a right-hand turn on emergency lights and temporarily stops, while the Defendant’s vehicle driver tried to overtake the Plaintiff’s parked vehicle on the right-hand side in breach of the duty of the front-hand driver and the duty of the safe driving, while trying to overtake the Plaintiff’s parked vehicle on the right side.