1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

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

B. On October 12:27, 2017, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven along a backway near the Dental Hospital located in Gwangjubuk-gu (hereinafter “instant road”), the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked at the right edge of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s running direction. In the process of operating the steering system into the left edge after the back, the Plaintiff’s vehicle conflict with the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s right side, thereby destroying the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On November 8, 2017, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,473,400 (= KRW 1,088,900) in total as repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (= KRW 384,500).

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (the evidence number No. 1) and the video and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s Defendant’s vehicle was illegally parked in the parking-prohibited area, and the Defendant’s vehicle driver was negligent in attempting to drive the Defendant’s vehicle on his own road without properly checking other vehicles, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle driver was unable to anticipate the Defendant’s vehicle that was parked and avoid collision. As such, the instant accident occurred due to the total negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, or at least the percentage of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle should be deemed 10:90.

B. The driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle violated the duty of care to safely pass the vehicle due to the following reasons: (a) the Plaintiff’s driver was able to have sufficiently predicted the start after the stop of the Defendant’s vehicle; and (b) the Plaintiff’s driver breached the duty of care to safely pass the vehicle due to driving, speeding, or sounding the horn