1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A car (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to B car (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

On October 19, 2017, around 16:41, 16:41, the two-lanes road in the north-gu C in the north-gu, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle while changing the course from the first lane to the second lane, and the Defendant’s left front side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which began from the second lane, has caused an accident of collision.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). On November 10, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,316,000 as the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle according to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul's evidence Nos. 5 through 7, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the plaintiff's assertion of the parties responsible for the accident of this case as to the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff asserts that the defendant's vehicle is entirely responsible for the defendant's vehicle, since the defendant's vehicle is illegally parked on the two-lanes without checking the front side and the left side, and the plaintiff's vehicle, which had already been passing ahead to the port of the defendant's vehicle and had already changed to the course on the two-lanes.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the main responsibility for the occurrence of the accident lies in the plaintiff's vehicle because the accident occurred because the plaintiff's vehicle did not give sufficient attention to the movement of the defendant's vehicle which starts slowly after stopping and did not turn on the direction light, and it did not turn on the direction light.

Judgment

According to the above facts and evidence, the defendant vehicle stops on the two-lanes where a yellow solid line is installed on the side of the road, and stops on the two-lanes where stopping is prohibited, and the plaintiff vehicle driven on the side of the one-lane starts from the front side, and it is recognized that two vehicles conflict while the plaintiff vehicle driven on the two-lanes in the course of attempting to change the two-lane vehicle in front of the defendant vehicle.

. Road Traffic Act;