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. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant”). The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant”).

On November 6, 2017, around 14:50 on the 14:50th day, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was in the direction of E using the opposite lane beyond the center line prior to reaching the intersection, there was an accident that shocks the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which is left left in the same direction (see attached accident scene).

The Plaintiff paid to the Defendant the full amount of KRW 7,260,000 for the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle according to the F Deliberation Committee’s decision (which determined that the ratio of negligence between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle was 100:0).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, the whole documentary evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by each of the instant evidence, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident was caused by the unilateral negligence of the Plaintiff vehicle.

A driver of the defendant vehicle who has made a left turn at the time is marked as a opposite lane beyond the median line during a period prior to the arrival of the intersection (in the attached Form, the plaintiff vehicle is marked as one opposite lane, but according to the B 3-2 video, it can be known that the plaintiff vehicle actually proceeds in the opposite lane) and did not have a duty of care to drive the vehicle by taking into account the movement of the plaintiff vehicle that was left left at the time and making a left turn.

(Simple change of lanes is not simple but a left turn at the intersection. As such, it is difficult for the driver of the defendant vehicle to find the plaintiff vehicle in reality, it is difficult for the driver of the vehicle to find the plaintiff vehicle). The driver of the defendant vehicle has partially invaded the central line before entering the intersection, and it is possible for the driver of the vehicle to operate the vehicle in excess of the left turn to the left at the intersection.