1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Facts of recognition

With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

Plaintiff

On October 28, 2016, when the vehicle was driven from the underground parking lot of the career apartment of the Hacheon-dong Village located in the Dongcheon-dong, the vehicle conflicts with the defendant vehicle that entered the above underground parking lot from the opposite direction of the vehicle's moving to the above underground parking lot. Accordingly, the part of the driver's vehicle in front of the left side of the plaintiff vehicle and the part of the driver's vehicle in front of the right side of the defendant vehicle were damaged.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). On November 21, 2016, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,018,340 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Based on the fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 5 (including the number of pages), Eul's evidence Nos. 2 through 4, the judgment on the ground of the claim as to the overall purport of the arguments, and the whole purport of each evidence, the above recognition facts and the whole purport of each evidence are divided into a white real line into an access road and an access road. At the time of the accident in this case, the defendant's vehicle entered the underground parking lot, which is the place of the accident in this case, into the underground parking lot, along with the access road bend to the bend, and part of the access road was invaded by the plaintiff's vehicle and the defendant's vehicle enter the bend to the bend, and therefore, the accident in this case is caused by the negligence committed by both the plaintiff's vehicle and the defendant's vehicle, and there is no special difference between the speed of the driving of the plaintiff's vehicle and the defendant's vehicle and the other party's lanes, and it is reasonable to 50:50.

On the other hand, the fact that the Plaintiff, the insurer of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, paid insurance money equivalent to KRW 1,018,340 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is recognized as above. Accordingly, the Defendant’s driver is out of the repair cost.