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. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”) and the Defendant is the driver of the E vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. Around 10:15 on September 7, 2018, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was traveling along four lanes on the four-lane road located in Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, the Defendant’s vehicle in the three-lane intends to overtake the Plaintiff vehicle and change its course into four-lanes. The Defendant’s front wheels part of the Defendant’s vehicle, with the rear wheels part of the Defendant’s front wheels, was shocked (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

C. As a result of the instant accident, the Plaintiff driver F suffered injuries, such as climatic salt, tension, etc.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 7 evidence, Eul 1 to 7 evidence (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Scope of and limitation on liability;

A. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 6-1, 2, and 7 of the defendant evidence Nos. 6-1, 6-2, and 7, the defendant suffered damages equivalent to 381,250 won for medical expenses, other damages, and 302,00 won for damages, and the defendant also suffered damages equivalent to 62,720 won for medical expenses, and the plaintiff paid 2,081,250 won to the driver F of the plaintiff vehicle by November 14, 2018, and recovered 482,580 won from the insurance company of the defendant vehicle, and paid 62,720 won for the defendant's medical expenses. However, the above evidence alone is recognized, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the driver of the plaintiff vehicle incurred losses in the future of 1,398,000 won for medical expenses.

B. Meanwhile, the Defendant asserted that the instant accident occurred when the Defendant attempted to change the vehicle line, and the Plaintiff’s fault should be limited to 70% of the Defendant’s fault, as it occurred while driving the vehicle by raising the speed of the Plaintiff’s own car.

However, the aforementioned evidence is admitted in addition to the overall purport of the argument.