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. 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 October 5, 2017, around 12:59, the Plaintiff’s vehicle came to a “T”-based crosssection near the Eastern East-si, Yangsan-si (hereinafter “instant crosssection”), and was driving ahead of the two-lanes of the two-lanes from the offline to the offline of the bus terminal from the offline to the offline of the cross-city bus terminal. However, the Defendant’s vehicle, the left-to-be left-hand turn on the left-hand side of the opposite side of the driving direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was shocked with the front front-way part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

By October 27, 2017, the Plaintiff paid 1,326,700 won for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (223,000 won for self-payment) due to the instant accident as insurance money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, Gap evidence 3 through 5, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 1 through 3, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's alleged vehicle was ordinarily straight and passed through the instant intersection. Since the defendant vehicle violated its duty of care and duty of safe driving at the time of entering the intersection, and the plaintiff vehicle was shocked to the left while protecting the plaintiff vehicle, the accident in this case occurred due to the total negligence of the defendant vehicle driver.

B. The Defendant’s alleged driver is also the Plaintiff’s vehicle driver who did not properly look at the Defendant’s vehicle that first entered the instant intersection and was at fault, and such driver’s fault ratio reaches 40%.

C. The driver of a vehicle who turn to the left at a non-protective left-hand left-hand turn in the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by adding up the above facts of recognition and the purport of the entire arguments as seen earlier, and the driver of the vehicle shall interfere with the vehicle coming from the opposite side.