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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle C (hereinafter “Defendant”) with respect to the vehicle B (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle C (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On March 3, 2014, around 19:42, the Defendant’s vehicle driven a two-lane between the two-lanes around the Gandong of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and attempted to change the lane in a one-lane manner, resulting in an accident (hereinafter “instant accident”). The front part of the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving ahead of the two-lanes on the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. By March 17, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 9,153,300 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as insurance money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries or videos of Gap's evidence 1 to 7, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The following circumstances acknowledged based on the above findings of recognition and evidence, namely, ① the Plaintiff’s vehicle was normally driven along one lane at the time of the instant accident, but the Defendant’s vehicle driven along the two lanes next to the accident attempted to make an illegal internship in a two-lane and one-lane, and ② the vehicle’s driver, as well as the vehicle driving behind the accident, is trusted to keep the vehicle in a normal way, barring any special circumstance, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s vehicle has a duty of care, such as predicting and accelerating the vehicle illegally driving along the two-lane and attempting to keep the median line in the form of overcoming the median line. ③ In light of the fact that the Defendant’s vehicle as the Plaintiff’s driver could not expect that the Defendant’s vehicle in the next lane would have attempted to keep the internship normally without using the direction direction, etc., the instant change of the vehicle in question without examining the situation of the accident in question.