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. The circumstances surrounding the instant accident are as follows.

At the time of the accident, the insured vehicle CD on November 14, 2018 at the time of the accident, and around 09:15 on November 14, 2018, the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the situation of the collision with the F in the vicinity of the E at the Namyang-si located in the Namyang-si, at the one-lane of the intersection of the instant crossing, entered the left at the intersection of the instant case by the Defendant vehicle, and the Defendant vehicle entered the right to the right to the intersection of the instant case, and KRW 4,056,00 (the insured vehicle’s own damage) on its own charges of KRW 20,000,000 when the front

B. The judgment of the first instance court judged the fault ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle as 50:50, and calculated the Plaintiff’s amount of reimbursement as KRW 1,928,000.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 5 evidence, Eul 3 and 4 evidence and images

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant accident occurred when the Defendant’s vehicle did not yield the course to the Plaintiff’s vehicle having priority over traffic, in violation of Article 26(2) and (4) of the Road Traffic Act at the instant intersection, and left the left. As such, the instant accident was wholly caused by the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle. (2) The instant accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not regulate traffic, while driving the instant vehicle into the instant intersection where a temporary stop line is installed, the Defendant’s vehicle did not temporarily stop and was negligent by neglecting its duty of safe driving without properly examining the movement of the Defendant’s vehicle.

B. According to the video of the evidence No. 5, ① the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not control traffic and did not temporarily stop at the instant intersection in which the temporary stop line was installed, and the Defendant’s left-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-on is not properly considered. ② According to Article 26(2) and (4) of the Road Traffic Act, the traffic is not controlled.