1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with C Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with D Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

B. Around 19:00 on June 11, 2019, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven the two-lanes of the three-lane road in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which is located in the Dong-dong of Dongjak-gu, from the boundary of the water zone to the shooting slope, and the Defendant’s vehicle driving the three-lanes of the same road intends to change the vehicle vehicle in front of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle was shocked by the front side of the steering seat of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

On July 3, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 4,487,400 (excluding KRW 500,000 of the self-paid share of the insured) as insurance money at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1 through 5, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that at the time of the accident in this case, the plaintiff's vehicle was driving in a normal straight line between the three-lane roads, but the defendant's vehicle changed from the three-lanes to the two-lanes, caused the plaintiff's vehicle to shock, and thus, the plaintiff's vehicle could not avoid the accident in this case. Thus, the accident was caused by the previous negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the driver of the plaintiff vehicle in relation to the accident is at least 30% of the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff vehicle in relation to the accident, although the driver of the plaintiff vehicle does not yield the driving of the vehicle while operating the direction from a considerable distance prior to the change of the vehicle line.

B. Article 19(3) of the Road Traffic Act provides that the driver of any motor vehicle shall change the course of the motor vehicle.