1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal shall be the first instance.

1. Basic facts

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

B. On September 28, 2019, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was making a left turn to the left at the crosssection near the right line at Suwon-si, the Plaintiff’s vehicle had a contact with the Defendant vehicle, which had been making a left turn to the left turn to overtake the Plaintiff vehicle at the rear of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(c)

Due to the instant accident, KRW 403,900 of the repair cost of the Plaintiff vehicle was incurred.

The Plaintiff paid 203,900 won, deducting 200,000 won, out of the damages of the Plaintiff’s automobile repair cost to E, the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, as insurance proceeds.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 8, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the accident in this case occurred from the whole negligence of the defendant vehicle due to an accident that occurred while the defendant was off from the guiding line in order to overtake the plaintiff vehicle that had been left normally and left left normally, and thus, the defendant is obliged to pay the full insurance money paid by the plaintiff and the delayed damages to the plaintiff as compensation.

The argument is asserted.

As to this, the Defendant asserted that the instant accident occurred because the Plaintiff’s vehicle is not at fault or the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle and the Plaintiff’s vehicle are concurrently involved in the instant accident, while proceeding to the third-lane of the way that the Defendant’s vehicle is proceeding to the third-lane of the way that the Defendant’s vehicle was proceeding to the third-lane of the intersection.

B. 1) We examine the case. The above evidence and evidence Nos. 7, 9-2.