1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

가. 피고는 2013. 12. 2. 09:50경 책임보험에 가입되어 있지 아니한 B 차량(이하 ‘피고측 차량’이라 한다)을 운전하여 목포시 북항동 신한비치팔레스 앞 사거리를 목포시청 방면에서 목포해양대학교 방면으로 직진 진행하던 중, 진행 방향 우측에서 같은 방면으로 우회전하려 하던 C 카니발 승용차(이하 ‘원고측 차량’이라 한다)와 서로 충돌하고, 그 충격으로 튕겨 나가면서 번호 불상의 택시를 들이받아 원고측 차량 운전자 D, 택시 운전자 E, 택시 승객 F가 상해를 입었다

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff’s automobile and is entrusted with the business of guaranteeing motor vehicle accident compensation pursuant to Article 30(1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and paid to E the insurance amount of KRW 1,384,180,740, and KRW 1,404,640, respectively.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 8 and 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion contributed to the Defendant’s negligence by neglecting his/her duty of care in the event of the instant accident. As such, the Plaintiff’s payment of the amount equivalent to the Defendant’s fault ratio out of the amount paid by the Plaintiff.

3. The judgment (the fact that the defendant submitted a written objection to the decision on performance recommendation to the court of first instance on September 2, 2014 that the plaintiff raised a written objection to the decision on performance recommendation is apparent in the record, and thus, it is determined based on evidence). In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence as seen earlier, the part of the collision between the two vehicles can be recognized as the part above the left-hand part of the plaintiff's vehicle and the right-hand part of the defendant's vehicle, and there is no counter-proof, and there is no counter-proof otherwise, and the fact that the defendant was proceeding in accordance with the direct rash. According to the above facts, according to the above recognition, the vehicle of the defendant on the part of