The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. Facts of recognition;

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

B. On July 23, 2019, around 19:35, the lower part on the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle, where the Plaintiff’s vehicle proceeding two lanes on the three-lane road in the direction near the F located in Heung-gu, Young-gu, Young-si, Young-si, is shocked into the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

On July 30, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 300,000 as the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant accident occurred due to the Defendant’s failure to commit the two-lanes on the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle that contributed to the instant accident is 100%.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 300,000 won and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged prior to the determination, comprehensively taking account of the evidence, evidence Nos. 2 through 4, and the overall purport of each film and pleading Nos. 4 through 7, namely, the Defendant’s vehicle appears to have driven around the three-lanes, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle appears to have broken over the three-lanes while driving around the two-lanes, and the instant accident appears to have occurred, in the front section of the Defendant vehicle, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s vehicle could not have confirmed the access of the Plaintiff vehicle, and it is difficult to see that the Plaintiff’s vehicle could have predicted the fact that the Plaintiff’s vehicle might walk on the bend road and walk down the vehicle. In light of all other circumstances, it is difficult to deem that there was any negligence on the occurrence of the instant accident with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

Therefore, it is true.