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 a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with respect to A individual taxi (hereinafter “Plaintiff”). The Defendant is an insurer that entered into a motor vehicle insurance agreement with respect to B-wheeled vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On September 22, 2016, around 21:50 on September 22, 2016, the Plaintiff’s vehicle proceeded along the two-lanes of the front road C located in front of the Plaintiff’s vehicle along the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes in the intersection in order to turn back to the terminal of cross-city bus, the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle running along the four-lanes of the Plaintiff vehicle was shocked with the right side of the Plaintiff vehicle, even with the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lane

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

The Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,263,930 in total under the pretext of the medical treatment and agreement of the above E arising from the instant accident.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry and video (including branch numbers, in the case of additional numbers) of Gap’s 1 through 4, Eul’s entry and purport of the whole pleadings

2. At the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff’s vehicle runs slowly along the direction direction, etc., and changed the lane in four lanes from the two lanes to the four lanes.

Therefore, the defendant's vehicle was sufficiently aware of the progress of the plaintiff's vehicle, so if the defendant fulfilled his duty of care, the accident of this case did not occur. Accordingly, the defendant's vehicle is also liable for 10% of the accident of this case.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the indemnity amount of KRW 126,390 and damages for delay within the scope of KRW 1,263,930 paid by the Plaintiff to E in accordance with the insurer subrogation doctrine under Article 682 of the Commercial Act.

3. In the instant accident, as to whether the Defendant’s vehicle was negligent, the evidence No. 1, No. 2, and No. 1 are written.