1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The pertinent Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant”), with respect to C vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”).

B. On November 23, 2017, at around 16:30 on November 23, 2017, there was an accident that conflicts with the Plaintiff’s vehicle, who was in the right turn to the left at the nearest distance of F in E at the time of racing.

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

The judgment of the first instance court judged the fault ratio of the plaintiff vehicle and the defendant vehicle as 30%:70%, and calculated the amount of the plaintiff's indemnity amount as the insurer of the plaintiff vehicle, which is 14,000,000 won paid by the plaintiff as the repair cost of the plaintiff vehicle, as the insurer of the plaintiff vehicle.

[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 1 to 3

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred when the defendant vehicle was making a left-hand turn in violation of the provisions of the non-protection left-hand turn. Thus, the defendant vehicle's fault ratio is 100%.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the defendant's fault ratio of the defendant's vehicle is 70% and that the judgment of the first instance is reasonable.

B. According to the video of the evidence No. 10, the Defendant’s vehicle was a non-protective patrol force within the three-distance distance in the location of the instant accident, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was proceeding in this part, found that the Defendant’s vehicle had already been a non-protective patrol force, did not take measures to prevent accidents, such as manipulating hand signals while driving the vehicle, and did so, and the accident of this case occurred. If the circumstances of the accident, etc. of the instant accident occur, the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, which neglected the duty of care before the non-protective patrol force, and the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which neglected the duty of care for safe driving.

The negligence ratio is 30% of the plaintiff's vehicle and 70% of the defendant's vehicle.