beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to C motor vehicles (the name of the vehicle: Bosch RexrothS 460L, 2007 formula, hereinafter “Plaintiff-motor vehicle”). The Defendant is a mutual aid insurer who has entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle mutual aid contract with respect to D motor vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant-motor vehicle”).
B. On July 27, 2018, the driver of the Defendant vehicle driving the Defendant vehicle and driving it on a two-lane road in front of the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju metropolitan E market, and the driver of the Defendant vehicle conflict with the Plaintiff vehicle, who was straighted in accordance with the new subparagraph, on the opposite side.
As a result, the plaintiff's vehicle was considerably damaged and scrapped.
C. On August 8, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,0150,000 to the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle with the total insurance proceeds in accordance with the special agreement on the security of his/her own vehicle damage, and recovered KRW 1,820,000 from the remainder.
[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-6, Eul evidence Nos. 1-5 or video, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the instant accident occurred due to the negligence of the Defendant’s driver.
Plaintiff
The defendant's assertion that the driver is negligent is not accepted.
(1) A vehicle that intends to turn to the left shall pay attention not to obstruct the vehicle coming from the opposite side of the proceeding signal at the time of the proceeding signal.
However, the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle did not properly examine the movement of the opposite side vehicle, and attempted to turn to the left immediately at the two-lanes other than the one-lane, and such errors caused the instant accident.
② On the other hand, the Plaintiff’s driver was in a normal position according to the personal name.
In addition, immediately before the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was in a situation in which the height of the Defendant’s vehicle was linked to two trucks with high height.