1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

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. Around April 11, 2016, the Plaintiff’s vehicle moved bypass from the branch line connected to the four-lane road of the long-distance long-distance flooded (hereinafter “instant road”) in the vicinity of the Dong-gu Daegu-dong-dong, Daegu-gu, to enter the said road into the first lane.

C. At the time, Cranc, which was driven along the two-lanes of the instant road (hereinafter “victim”), was stopped by the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the right-hand side as above. However, the Defendant’s vehicle, which was driven behind the damaged vehicle, was an accident to conceal the damaged vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

After paying insurance money to the driver of the damaged vehicle, the Defendant filed a petition for deliberation with the committee for deliberation on the dispute over the rate of negligence related to the accident of this case between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff. The said committee determined the ratio of negligence of the Plaintiff vehicle to 20% and the ratio of negligence of the Defendant vehicle to 80%

E. On November 4, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 714,040, an amount equivalent to 20% of the negligence ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the Defendant according to the determination of the said commission.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap's evidence 1 to 8, photographs and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the assertion was that the Plaintiff’s vehicle was parked in one lane after entering the instant road in a normal way, and the damaged vehicle, which the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven after the second line of the vehicle stopped in the first line, was discovered and stopped.

However, the defendant vehicle's failure to secure the safety distance and caused the accident of this case to shock the damaged vehicle due to the negligence of neglecting the front-down.

Therefore, the change of the course of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is the instant accident.