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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff’s vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”), with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle B (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).

나. C은 2014. 4. 5. 08:20경 피고 차량을 운전하여 인천시 계양구 서운동 서운체육공원 사거리 부근에 이르러 신호에 따라 정차한 선행차량과의 충돌을 피하기 위하여 급히 편도 4차로 도로의 2차로에서 3차로로 차로변경을 하다가 3차로에서 주행하던 원고 차량의 운전석 측면을 피고 차량의 조수석 측면 부위로 충격하였고, 그로 인하여 원고 차량이 우측 전방으로 튕겨나가 위 사거리 교차로에 설치된 교통섬 안의 신호등을 충격하는 바람에 신호등이 넘어지면서 그 옆에 서있던 D(이하 망인이라고 한다)이 신호등에 머리를 맞아 사망하는 사고가 발생하였다

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

In relation to the instant accident, the Defendant paid KRW 71,231,00 to the deceased’s bereaved family members as agreed money, and then filed a claim for the reimbursement according to the Plaintiff’s fault ratio with respect to the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff did not comply with it, and accordingly, requested deliberation by the Motor Vehicle Insurance Dispute Deliberation Committee (hereinafter “former Inquiry Committee”). On May 29, 2014, the judgment of the lower court determined the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as 10% and the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle as 90%, and accordingly, on May 30, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,123,100 equivalent to the above agreed money paid by the Defendant to the Defendant as KRW 71,231,00.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted by the parties, when the driver of the defendant vehicle drives the defendant vehicle without securing the safety distance with the prior vehicle, and the prior vehicle stops at the place of the accident, the plaintiff's allegation is a three-lane where the plaintiff vehicle is running without considering the surrounding area to avoid the collision.