1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

At the time of the accident, at around 22:30 on July 1, 2019 at the time of the accident, the Defendant’s vehicle changed the two lanes from the five-lanes to the three-lanes of the five-lanes of the Taesi-dong, Ulsan-dong, Busan-dong, Busan-dong, the location of the collision between the Defendant’s vehicle CD at the time of the accident, and changed the two-lanes from the two-lanes of the five-lanes of the above Taesi-dong, Taesi-dong, the vehicle was moving to the area of Taesi-si. However, the Plaintiff’s vehicle, who was driving ahead of the three-lane stop before the three-lane stop, has paid the collision insurance proceeds to the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, and KRW 500,000,00 of the self-charge of the

1. The circumstances leading to the instant accident are as follows.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 10, Eul evidence 1 to 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident of this case occurred due to the total negligence of the defendant vehicle, which caused the failure of the plaintiff vehicle to use the lane, the interference with the operation, the transmission, and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case occurred when the plaintiff vehicle, which is the latter vehicle, was changed from the fourth to the third one in his own vehicle, and the accident of this case was the whole negligence of the plaintiff vehicle.

B. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the aforementioned facts of recognition 1 and the overall purport of the arguments, namely, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was stopped on three lanes prior to the Defendant’s vehicle, but after that, the Defendant’s vehicle was proceeding to the front of the Plaintiff’s vehicle with the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the rear.