1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to D Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On May 5, 2018, at around 17:10, the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the intersection where the F department stores located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, Seonam-si is rounding to the G apartment bank on the three-lane road in the direction of the exit of the board intersection. The Plaintiff’s vehicle in the intersection where the right ofpass was made along three-lanes and the Defendant’s vehicle that was bypassed to two-lanes while

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”)

C. On May 15, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,385,690 as insurance proceeds for the Plaintiff’s repair expenses incurred due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 4 through 9 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The following circumstances revealed by the above recognition facts and the evidence mentioned above: (i) The road of the department store exit exit is both a three-lane road prior to the bypass; (ii) the vehicle parked on the three-lane road of the G apartment site at the time of the bypassing from the three-lane road; and (iii) the vehicle is parked on the three-lane road of the G apartment site at the time of the bypassing from the three-lane road, and the vehicle entered a two-lane other than the three-lane road, and the two-lane area of the apartment site at the department entrance, which led to a conflict between the defendant vehicle and the defendant vehicle who was trying to bypass from the two-lane road of the department store entrance entrance to the apartment site at the right side of the intersection; and (iii) the defendant vehicle was transferred to the treatment meeting despite the fact that the vehicle was bypassing the apartment site at the right side of the intersection; and (iv) the vehicle was conducted without due care to prevent any collision or collision between the plaintiff vehicle and the defendant vehicle and the defendant vehicle.

Therefore, the defendant's 1,354,276 won (=3,385,690 won x 0.4) and this.