1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. At the time of the occurrence of the basic fact-finding accident, the insured vehicle CD of the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, at the time of the occurrence of the basic fact-finding accident, paid the insurance proceeds to the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, on June 5, 2019, the insurance proceeds of the collision (hereinafter “the instant accident”) between the front part of the Defendant vehicle and the rear part of the Plaintiff’s left rear part of the vehicle, which had been driving on the road in the direction of the collision between the Plaintiff’s insurable vehicle in the direction of the collision (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) at the location of the Daegu Seo-gu E-gu hotel in the direction of the collision (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) on January 20, 201, the circumstances of the instant accident are as follows:

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the instant accident was parked in order to prevent the Plaintiff’s vehicle from impeding the passage of other vehicles, but the Defendant’s vehicle was negligent in driving and front-handing, thereby causing the Defendant’s overall fault. 2) The Defendant’s main point of the allegation was that the Plaintiff’s vehicle illegally parked at an intersection where parking is prohibited at night and causing a high level of accident. As such, the instant accident was not only the duty of front-handing of the Defendant’s vehicle, but also the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

B. Determination 1) In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings as seen earlier, it is reasonable to view that the instant accident was caused by the negligence between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle, and that the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was 20%, and that the negligence of the Defendant vehicle was 80%.

(1) The three-distance intersection where the Defendant’s vehicle fails to keep his/her embankment properly.