1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to B-wheeled vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On May 28, 2015, at around 23:15, the Plaintiff’s vehicle, one lane near the intersection 61-o, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Jacheon-ro, Ga-ro, 61-gil, was entered the said intersection from the Han new apartment room to the private distance slope of the So-si. On the other hand, the Defendant’s vehicle entering the said intersection, which is the side road installed on the right side of the Plaintiff-in vehicle’s running along the one-way road along the running direction, was shocked with the front rear of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as the front wheels of the Defendant vehicle.

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

On June 11, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,500,000 as repair expenses.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 17, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred due to the unilateral negligence of the defendant's vehicle, and the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's vehicle should take into account the negligence that the plaintiff's vehicle did not temporarily stop or stop at the intersection before entering the intersection.

B. In light of the above-mentioned facts and the evidence presented by the defendant alone, even if both vehicles have entered the same time, the plaintiff's vehicle is deemed to have entered the road, the defendant's vehicle has preferential traffic right to the plaintiff's vehicle, the defendant's side road is one-way road and it is difficult to view that the defendant's vehicle has a duty of care to avoid it by predicting that the vehicle has a reverse driving on the plaintiff's vehicle and to avoid it. In light of the above-mentioned facts and the fact that it is difficult to view that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the defendant's vehicle.

Therefore, the defendant is against the plaintiff.