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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with the A-learning vehicle owned by the Co., Ltd. Intenet (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is the insurer who has concluded the automobile insurance contract with the B-B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On December 29, 2016, around 16:46, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was dealing with the accident by getting snow off on the way to prevent the string of the cross-driving dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong, and the Defendant’s vehicle also turns snow on the way, and the Defendant’s vehicle caused an accident by shocking the parts behind the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On February 2, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,390,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident. Among them, the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle behind the instant accident is KRW 1,384,050.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to shocking of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was in the process of dealing with the accident while the Defendant’s vehicle turns off along the snow, and the fault ratio between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle is about 10:90.

Therefore, the defendant, who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1,245,640 won (1,384,050 won x 90%) and damages for delay.

B. In light of the details of the instant accident, the location of each vehicle, and the collision level, which can be seen by the evidence as seen earlier, the instant accident was committed on the Plaintiff’s road without taking measures to prevent the negligence and subsequent accident, despite the fact that the Defendant’s failure to perform such duty of care is sufficiently secured when driving a vehicle in the situation where the snow drops off, taking into account the movement distance.