1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to AWz vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”). The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to BK3 vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

B. On August 14, 2017, the driver of the Plaintiff vehicle driven the Plaintiff vehicle on August 14, 2017, while driving the Plaintiff vehicle and driving the vehicle along the Defendant vehicle on the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle, according to the direction of the Plaintiff vehicle, while driving the vehicle on the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle, plastic objects in four-dimensional shapes were protruding away from the lower part of the Defendant vehicle and the front part of the Plaintiff vehicle.

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

On December 27, 2017 due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff paid KRW 900,000 to the branch office of Hansung Automobile Co., Ltd. at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant accident is based on the total negligence of the driver of the Defendant vehicle, since the instant accident occurred from the previous Defendant vehicle with plastic objects located far away.

Therefore, the driver of the defendant vehicle is liable for damages caused by the accident in this case to the insured of the plaintiff vehicle, and the plaintiff paid insurance money of KRW 900,000 for the insured of the plaintiff vehicle, thereby acquiring the right to claim damages against the driver of the insured vehicle by subrogation as stipulated in Article 682 of the Commercial Act.

Therefore, the defendant, who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of indemnity KRW 900,000 and damages for delay.

B. Therefore, it is not sufficient to recognize that the images of Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 6, and evidence Nos. 3 and 5 are separated from the defendant's vehicle prior to the shocking plastic objects, and it is different.