1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On July 15, 2015, around 13:28, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle shocked the right-hand part of the Defendant’s vehicle that changed the two lanes from the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the front part of the two lanes in front of the apartment complex 6-lane in Yongsan-gu, Seogu, Daegu-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City.

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

On August 31, 2015, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 2,135,000 at the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff's negligence of the defendant vehicle is 100% since the defendant vehicle was changed in his own lane from the first lane to the second lane during normal operation.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle is more than 80% since the plaintiff's vehicle, who was in the illegal parking or stopping, entered the first lane without examining the left side of the vehicle, without attaching even the vehicle on the right side of the road in the parking-prohibited zone.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged as being comprehensively taken into account the respective descriptions and images of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, i.e., ① there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff’s vehicle in a parking or parking place changed the vehicle to one lane on its own. Rather, the accident column of the on-site departure report prepared by the Defendant’s employee, stating “an accident in which the Defendant’s vehicle contacted with the Plaintiff’s vehicle starting after stopping while changing from the first to the second line,” and ② the two-lanes in which the Plaintiff stopped or stopped are viewed as a parking prohibition area with the right edge indicated as yellow solid lines.