1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to Adisbert vehicle (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff vehicle"), and the defendant is the owner of B-si vehicle (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant vehicle").

The outline of the instant accident is as follows.

On July 1, 2016, the date and time of the accident: On July 1, 2016, the accident occurred due to the intersection of 202 local hospital distance: The accident occurred with the defendant's vehicle moving ahead of the plaintiff's vehicle while driving ahead of it to the direction of the distance of the bankruptcy as the course of the above intersection.

By November 30, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the total amount of KRW 5,292,450 to the repair cost of the Plaintiff vehicle and the medical expenses of passengers.

【Where the driver of any motor vehicle intends to make a right-hand side at an intersection, he/she shall proceed along the right-hand side of the road in advance, and make a right-hand side at the intersection from 30 meters to 30 meters before the right-hand side of the intersection. The driver of any motor vehicle shall, in case where he/she intends to make a right-hand side at the intersection, make a signal by hand, direction-setting, etc. from 30 meters before the right-hand side of the intersection

(Article 25(1) and 38(1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, and attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. In addition, drivers shall drive safely by checking well the right and the right and the right of the front and the right of the front and the right of the front and the right of the front and the right of the front and the right of the right of the front and the right of the front and the right

According to the evidence revealed above the occurrence of liability for damages and negligence ratio, both the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle were bypassing from the right lane to the right side of the road, the Defendant’s vehicle was driving ahead of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle first was driving ahead of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and it started from the point of indication of the no-stop zone of the tram.