1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid operator who has entered into an automobile mutual aid contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On February 5, 2015, around 18:11, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven along the two-lanes of the three-lane road in front of the D Mental Hospital located in North Korea-gu, Mapo-si. The Defendant’s vehicle following the change of the two-lanes, followed by the change of the two-lanes, followed by the change of the two-lanes, and the change of the two-lanes into the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle and the front part of the back part of the lower part.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On November 4, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 319,300 of the insurance money as repair expenses.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the party’s assertion is that the Plaintiff: (a) intending to change the vehicle in order to overtake the Plaintiff’s vehicle that ought to be driven by the Defendant’s vehicle while making a light; and (b) intending to change the vehicle to overtake the Plaintiff’s vehicle; (c) thus, the responsibility for the occurrence of the said accident lies in the Defendant’s vehicle; and (d) the Defendant asserted that the said accident occurred while changing the vehicle in order to overtake the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to any defect in sudden or intentionally, on three occasions; and (e) the said accident was that the Plaintiff’s vehicle caused the sudden driving of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the statements or images in Gap evidence Nos. 6 through 11 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers), the plaintiff vehicle driven along the two lanes and tried to enter the three-lane road, which was set up on the right side of the three-lanes between the two-lanes in order to change the two-lanes, and the defendant vehicle tried to move into the three-lane one another. Accordingly, the defendant vehicle turns into the port side and avoiding conflicts with the plaintiff vehicle, and the plaintiff vehicle entering the three-lanes again.