beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is an insurance company that has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”). The Defendant is an insurance company that entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).
B. On January 4, 2017, around 19:19, at the night room in Gwangju-dong, Gwangju-gu, the vehicle driven along the 3rd line in the parallel section, along the 3rd line, along the 3rd lane, while driving along the 150rd line. The Defendant, depending on the Plaintiff’s vehicle, changed the lanes from the 3rd lane to the 2nd lane, she moved to the 2nd part of the back side of the Defendant vehicle, as above.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.
On March 16, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 9,940,00 (the amount stated in evidence A7 and the amount claimed by the Plaintiff) to the Insurance Money due to the instant accident, and applied for deliberation and mediation against the Defendant (hereinafter “Deliberation Committee”). On June 5, 2017, the Deliberation Committee decided that the ratio of the negligence between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle was 60:40, and the Plaintiff appealed and filed an application for reexamination. The Deliberation Committee decided that the ratio of the negligence between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle was 60:40 on July 24, 2017, on the ground that “the change of the lane of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was caused by the accident involving the change of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the Defendant’s failure to immediately delay the Plaintiff’s operation, and thus, appears to have been partially neglected at all times at all times, and determined that the ratio of the negligence between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle was 60:40.
Accordingly, on July 28, 2017, the Defendant paid 4,176,000 won to the Plaintiff out of 10,440,000 won, which was stated by the said Deliberation Committee.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 9 evidence, each entry and video of Eul 1 to 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The argument and judgment.