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.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with C (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with D (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) as an automobile insurance business operator.

On September 11, 2018, around 33 minutes around September 11, 2018, there was an accident in which the back portion on the left side of the Plaintiff vehicle and the front side of the Defendant vehicle are inferred (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”).

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, the assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's alleged vehicle used the plaintiff's vehicle for normal driving along the three-lanes of the four-lane road, the defendant vehicle left the plaintiff's vehicle's own in front of the plaintiff's vehicle.

Therefore, while the plaintiff's vehicle is proceeding to the right side, it conflicts with the back side of the plaintiff's vehicle into the right side of the defendant's vehicle as the defendant's vehicle added the plaintiff's vehicle to the right side.

The Plaintiff paid 597,910 won to the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle for damages caused by the instant traffic accident, and acquired by subrogation the right to indemnity against the Defendant. The Defendant, as the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the said 597,910 won and damages for delay.

Judgment

In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the video products as shown in the evidence Nos. 3 through 6, the evidence Nos. 3 through 6, the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including the number of branch numbers), the evidence No. 8, and the evidence No. 4, the fact that the traffic accident of this case occurred while the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving along the three-lanes on the two-lanes to the three-lanes is recognized.

However, through the above evidence.