1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

1. On January 10, 2019, the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) Defendant Insured vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant’s insured vehicle”) in the case of the Plaintiff’s indemnity insurance relation between the insurer of the vehicle involved in the traffic accident: (a) the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle in the case of the instant accident on the three-lane road in front of E on January 18:52, 2019; (b) the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the case of the instant accident was in progress by preventing the change of course from two-lanes; (c) the Defendant’s vehicle running the first lane entered the two-lane course, and the front part of the right part and the left part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle

Details of the payment of insurance proceeds shall be 1,925,200 won after deducting 300,000 won for self-payment of insurance proceeds.

(a) Circumstances, etc. involving accidents;

B. The instant accident, which judged negligence, did not properly examine the following vehicles, and caused the negligence of the Defendant vehicle that entered the two lanes rapidly.

However, at the time, the traffic situation has ever been ever, and there were many vehicles that change the course.

Plaintiff

At the time of the change of course into a two-lane, the Defendant’s vehicle had already followed the direction direction, etc. in order to change course into a two-lane, but it seems that the Plaintiff’s driver could have sufficiently known this situation.

In light of these circumstances, the Plaintiff’s driver is deemed to have been negligent in the occurrence of the instant accident even for the Plaintiff’s vehicle that failed to properly operate the instant vehicle by taking into account the movement of the Defendant’s vehicle preceding the next lane, or by sounding the seat. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is deemed to have been negligent in the occurrence of the instant accident.

In full view of all the above circumstances, it is reasonable to view the negligence ratio between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle as 30:70.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

(c) Defendant’s duty of reimbursement 1,257,640 won = (insurance money paid to Plaintiff 1,925,200 won for self-payment of KRW 300,000) ¡¿ 70% - Self-payment of KRW 300,000)

2. The judgment of the first instance court at the same time is justified, and the Plaintiff’s appeal is justifiable.