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. Basic facts

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

B. At around 18:00 on October 1, 2012, C: (a) driven the Defendant’s vehicle and go straight to a funeral room of the Republic of Korea at the same east of the king-ri, king-ri, mountain road intersection at the time of the week; (b) while passing the said intersection in the form of remaining-on and toward the same east of the number of east-do along the middle point of the said intersection, it conflicts with the fronter of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was going to go to the said intersection on the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle at the Young-gu, Young-gu, U.S., the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of the said intersection.

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

At the time of the accident, the above intersection was installed with a signal apparatus for the vehicle, but all of the direction of the driving of the original defendant vehicle was yellow flickering lights.

On December 22, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,423,660 of the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle as insurance money, and then filed a request for deliberation with the Defendant (hereinafter “Deliberation Committee”) by the committee for deliberation on disputes over liability for reimbursement of automobile insurance (hereinafter “Deliberation Committee”). The deliberation committee set the error ratio on the part of the Plaintiff against the Defendant against the Plaintiff: 6: 4. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking reimbursement against the Defendant on August 29, 2014 after obtaining the Defendant’s consent in regard to an action against the said decision.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 3 (including each number in the case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted by the parties, the instant accident is proceeding to the opposite direction by the Defendant’s driver of the vehicle in the middle of the intersection.