beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. As to the B K7 car owned by the Plaintiff with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), the Defendant is the insurer who concluded the respective automobile insurance contract with the Plaintiff as to the C C C bodyman car (hereinafter “Defendant”), which is owned by the Plaintiff with the Defendant.
B. At around 15:15 on April 13, 2014, D, while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and going straight straight on the road in the vicinity of the F Hospital located in the Changwon-si E Hospital located in Changwon-si, the part of the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which attempted to make a right-way from the runway on the right-hand side of the Plaintiff vehicle, was shocked.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.
On May 26, 2014, the Plaintiff paid the repair cost of KRW 1,527,00 to A, and requested the Defendant to recover the full amount of the repair cost on the premise of D’s exemption from liability, but the Defendant failed to comply with this request. However, the Plaintiff filed a request against the Defendant for deliberation on the claim amount of KRW 1,727,00 on the premise that D’s liability ratio for the instant accident is zero per cent.
The committee for deliberation on car insurance disputes determined the ratio of liability of the Plaintiff vehicle to 30% and the ratio of liability of the Defendant vehicle to 70%. However, in the procedure of review held by the Plaintiff, the ratio of liability of the Plaintiff vehicle to 20% on December 8, 2014 and the ratio of liability of the Defendant vehicle to 80% on December 8, 2014.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1's evidence or Gap 8's evidence, and Eul 1's evidence (including branch numbers, if any), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to the unilateral negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle that attempted to make a right-to-way without properly viewing the vehicle, and thus, the Defendant, the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, is liable to pay insurance money for the damage of A, which is the victim of the instant accident.
However, the Plaintiff exempted the Defendant from liability by compensating all damages to A.