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. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”). The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to E vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).
B. On July 30, 2018, around 08:24, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, a driver of the Plaintiff, was running along the three-lane course from the third-lane road to the two-lane course near the Seo-gu Incheon Seodong Incheon Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, and caused an accident corresponding to the Defendant’s vehicle that has changed the two-lane course (hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. On October 31, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 285,000 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, except for KRW 200,000,000, as the instant accident insurance amount.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5, 7, 10 evidence, Eul evidence 1-1, 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence revealed prior to the determination of the percentage of fault, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is proceeding from three lanes to two lanes, and the Defendant’s vehicle rapidly changed the course from one lane to two lanes without a career change signal. The Defendant’s vehicle was the front wheeler part of the Plaintiff’s front gate and front gate, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the time of the accident, but did not complete the course.
In light of all the circumstances, such as the background of the instant accident and shocking parts, the instant accident is deemed to have occurred by the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver who changed the course without thoroughly examining the main fault of the Defendant’s driver who changed his course and the surrounding traffic situation, without any signal while the instant accident occurred. It is reasonable to view that the negligence ratio between the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver is 20% large.
B. The Plaintiff is entitled to the reimbursement.