The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

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

B. On February 13, 2019, around 18:30 on February 13, 2019, the Plaintiff’s vehicle moved along the five-lane roads near the Nam-gu E apartment complex into two-lanes, and conflict with the Defendant’s vehicle changing the way from the first lane to the two-lane left (hereinafter “instant accident”).

On April 12, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 6,863,80,00 as insurance money after deducting KRW 500,000 from the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's right to indemnity

A. The following circumstances can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the above basic facts and the evidence as mentioned above. In other words, if the driver of the defendant vehicle attempt to change the course from the first lane to the second lane at the time of the accident in this case, he could sufficiently obstruct or conflict the normal passage of the vehicle that was driven on the second lane. The plaintiff vehicle's change of course to the second lane at the time of the accident in this case would have known that the driver of the vehicle in this case would have caused the plaintiff vehicle to walk on the second lane. However, if the driver of the vehicle in this case could attempt to change the course to the second lane because the vehicle in this case could have attempted to change the course to the second lane, such as operating the direction as well as the other vehicle in the first lane as well as the vehicle in this case, the collision with the plaintiff vehicle could have been avoided if the driver did not neglect the duty of moving on the second lane, and in light of the occurrence of the accident in this case, the situation of the accident in this case, the accident in this case and the accident rate of the defendant.