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. Facts of recognition;

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), the Defendant is each insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On March 20, 2017, around 19:09, the Defendant’s vehicle was driving along the two-lanes of the intersection line in Yangcheon-gu Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul. However, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle traveling along the two-lanes in the same direction, the part on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the part on the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle were shocked.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On April 3, 2017, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 361,000 (the exemption amount of KRW 200,000) as insurance money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry or video of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant accident occurred due to the overall negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, as it was caused by the failure of the Defendant’s vehicle to live well in the front section, even though the Plaintiff’s vehicle operated a direction-setting, etc., and changed the vehicle with sufficient space with the Defendant’s vehicle. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the indemnity amount of KRW 361,00 and the damages for delay thereof. (2) The instant accident occurred due to the Plaintiff’s unreasonable entry while changing the vehicle.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the above-mentioned facts and the purport of the entire arguments, the place where the instant accident occurred is one-lane road at the time of the accident, and the said road was at the time of the accident. The instant accident is prevented by preventing the accident, such as the negligence of the driver of the Plaintiff, who changed the lane from the two-lane to the one-lane one-lane one while neglecting the duty of safety driving, and the fault of the driver of the Plaintiff, who changed the lane from the two-lane to the one-lane one-lane one, and the situation of the front section