beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid operator who has entered into an automobile mutual aid contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).
B. On December 9, 2017, around 13:58, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding as one-lane at the place where the two-way left turn turn turn is added to the two-way left turn-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-on on the spons village in the Seopong-dong, Sejong-gu, Busan-si. However, there was an accident where the left-hand turn-hand turn-on part of the Defendant’s vehicle that changed from the left-hand turn-on to the one-lane and the front part of the Plaintiff’s driver’s seat (hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. On December 28, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,683,00 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driving at the time of the instant accident, with the signal apparatus at the front section of the road along the one lane of the point where the accident occurred, changing the speed by red lights. The instant accident occurred when the Defendant’s vehicle was changed from the left-hand lane of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the front-hand left-hand lane, and by the front negligence of the Defendant vehicle, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the indemnity amounting to KRW 3,683,000 and the delay damages therefor, in accordance with the insurer’s subrogation legal doctrine. (ii) The Defendant’s vehicle was directed to attempt to change the lanes from the first lane to the second lane, instead of returning to the first lane and proceeding at a speed.
Plaintiff
The defendant's vehicle, which was operated behind the vehicle, tried to change the vehicle from the vehicle to the two-lanes, and was not anticipated to return the vehicle to the first place, so it is only a change of the vehicle from the left to the first one.