1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A Eub Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to BF vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On September 14, 2017, around 00:27, the Plaintiff’s vehicle received the front side of the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle on the front side of the front of the 120-dong Sinsi-dong YIG Building first apartment complex 120-dong.

C. On October 19, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 18,130,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, Eul 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the above accident is an accident caused by competition between the negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle and the negligence of the defendant's vehicle who illegally parked, and that the negligence ratio is "80% of the plaintiff's vehicle: 20% of the defendant's vehicle."

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the above accident is an accident caused exclusively by the negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle.

3. According to the evidence No. 6 of the judgment of the court below, it can be recognized that the defendant's vehicle was parked at the edge of the above accident in a part of the road where yellow solid lines were parked at the edge of the above accident. Thus, Article 8 (2) [Attachment 6] Ⅱ of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act;

5. According to the surface labelling and serial number 516, it is recognized that the yellow solid line is an indication of prohibition of parking and stopping, so it was found that the Defendant’s vehicle was in a state of illegal parking at the time of the accident.

However, the defendant's vehicle was in a state of illegal parking.

In order to hold the defendant's vehicle liable for the above accident, there is no natural or factual causation between the negligence of the defendant's vehicle and the above accident, i.e., ideological or legal causation, i., proximate causal relationship, and in determining the existence of proximate causal relationship, the law imposes not only the probability of general outcome but also the duty of care.