1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1.The following facts of recognition may be acknowledged either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the overall purport of the pleadings in the entries and images of Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 6 (including paper numbers):

The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to B (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”).

B. On June 17, 2016, around 16:09, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered one lane from the official intersection (hereinafter “instant intersection”) located in the official intersection (hereinafter “instant intersection”) in the city of nuclear power, from the southwest and northwest to the right side of the northwest and changed the lane into the two lane of the said road (hereinafter “instant road”), and received the part of the Defendant’s vehicle running the two-lane to the right side of the Plaintiff’s right side.

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

On June 23, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 905,200 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

2. According to the above facts of recognition and the evidence mentioned above, the accident of this case can be deemed to have occurred from the first lane of the road of this case to the second lane, and it can be deemed that the driver of this case suffered from the negligence of the plaintiff vehicle of this case.

However, if a driver of the defendant vehicle enters the two-lanes of the road of this case by making a left turn to the left at the intersection of this case, the driver is negligent in neglecting his duty of care, even though he had a duty of care to look at the movement and distance of the plaintiff vehicle entering the one lane of this case and prevent accidents from occurring.

In light of the above circumstances, such as the background of the accident, the degree of the conflict, and the degree thereof, it is reasonable to 20% of the negligence ratio between the plaintiff vehicle and the defendant vehicle driver.

Therefore, the defendant 181,040 won = 905.