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. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The facts of recognition (1) The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the ASP vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), and the Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the B AS test vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

(2) While under the influence of alcohol content 0.247%, the driver of the Defendant vehicle caused an accident where the part on the right part of the Plaintiff vehicle, which was proceeding on July 23, 2015, reaches the right part of the bus stop located in the new village of 214, i.e., the new bus stop located in the new village of 214, was driven on the right side of the bus stop in the new-dong bank at the brea-dong bank, while driving on the right side of the new-dong bank at the brea-dong bank (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(3) From August 27, 2015 to November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,737,120 in total with medical expenses and agreed money to the Plaintiff’s driver and his/her passenger who suffered from the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5, 8 through 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of determination, the accident of this case is deemed to have occurred due to the negligence of the defendant's driver of the vehicle that caused the plaintiff's driving lane beyond the center line in the case of the plaintiff's driving vehicle because the accident of this case was caused by the negligence of the defendant's driver who caused the plaintiff's driving vehicle beyond the center line in the case of the plaintiff's driving vehicle by neglecting the steering direction in the front direction in the drinking state and not properly operating the steering

In this regard, the Defendant erred by neglecting the duty of safe driving, such as neglecting the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to neglect the front week, and such negligence contributed to the occurrence and expansion of damages caused by the instant accident, and thus, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is calculated when calculating the amount of damages in accordance with the Defendant’s duty of indemnity.