1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff asserts that the ratio of liability of the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) to the instant accident is merely 10%, and that according to the decision of the committee for deliberation on indemnity amount, the Plaintiff paid KRW 903,600, the amount of damages of the Defendant’s insured vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”) to the Defendant on September 24, 2014 equivalent to 90% of the amount of damages of KRW 1,004,00,000, pursuant to the decision of the committee for deliberation on indemnity amount, the Defendant should return the amount of KRW 803,200 (=903,600 - the Plaintiff’s negligence 90,360) and the delay damages.

However, in light of the following circumstances revealed by the result of the verification of the accident video of this court, the data submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to deem that the Plaintiff’s liability ratio is less than 90%, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The accident of this case is the case where the left side of the left side of the defendant vehicle, which was left to turn to the left two-lanes of the left side of a waterTollll in the narrow side of the water-IC intersection distance, is shocked into the front side of the plaintiff vehicle driving to the right side of the left.

The defendant's vehicle clearly entered the two-lanes of the above intersection, and the plaintiff's vehicle entered the one-lanes of the above intersection and there is a conflict in the process of overtaking the defendant's vehicle.

The point where the accident of this case occurred is the place where the third third-party shooting line is from the intersecting point of the fire-fighting control line marked at the intersection.

The fire-fighting control line corresponding to the two-lanes of the above intersection can be seen as responding to the two-lane left-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-on of the intersection from the intersecting point of the left-hand turn-hand turn-on, and the first to the third to the third to the above intersection from the third to the right-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-hand turn-on of the intersection, so the defendant vehicle cannot be deemed to have reconvened.

Rather, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is late after the point at which the right-hand turn begins.