1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is subject to Paragraph (1).

1. Basic facts

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

B. On July 10, 2017, around 18:50, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven along the two lanes near the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul East-gu E-lane in the direction of air exhaust distance from the two-lanes of air exhausters. However, the Defendant’s vehicle driven along the three-lanes of the said road and attempted to change the two-lanes to the two-lanes, and in this process, the part following the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle was shocked on the front right part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

In the instant accident, KRW 1,146,00 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle occurred, and on September 14, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 917,000 (=1,146,000 - 229,000), which deducted the Plaintiff’s self-charges (exempt) from KRW 229,00.

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

2. Determination

A. (1) The plaintiff's assertion (1) although the road of this case is a child protection zone, the defendant's vehicle was accelerated beyond the limited speed, the direction of the left-hand side was rapidly changed to the two-lanes without turning on the direction, and the vehicle was rapidly driven without any particular reason.

Plaintiff

Since the driver of the vehicle could not predict such abnormal operation of the Defendant vehicle or avoid collision, the responsibility of the instant accident lies solely on the Defendant vehicle driver.

(2) The instant accident occurred due to the negligence that the Plaintiff’s vehicle was found and was not bound to detect the Defendant’s vehicle, and the Plaintiff’s driver should also be recognized as the percentage of negligence by 20%.

B. (1) Determination of the percentage of negligence is made by Article 12(1) of the Road Traffic Act.