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. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

나. C은 2014. 12. 23. 05:20경 피고 차량을 운전하여 춘천시 D 소재 편도 2차로(우회전 전용 포켓차로 제외) 도로 중 2차로를 따라 진행하다가 E 앞 십자형 교차로에 이르러 위 교차로를 퇴계주공6차아파트 방면에서 남춘천역 방면으로 직진으로 통과하려던 중, 때마침 피고 차량 진행 방향 좌측에서 우측으로 위 교차로를 진행하던 원고 차량의 우측 뒤 펜더 부분을 피고 차량 앞범퍼 부분으로 충격하였고, 그 충격으로 튕겨난 원고 차량은 180도 가까이 시계 방향으로 회전한 후 피고 차량의 우측 앞쪽에 정차하였다

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

Although the above distance intersection was installed with a signal apparatus for the vehicle, only yellow light was operated at the time of the accident of this case. D.

On January 14, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 550,000 as insurance money for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleading [Evidence of Evidence] Gap evidence No. 1

2. The plaintiff argued by the parties that the accident in this case occurred when the driver of the defendant's vehicle first enters the intersection and tried to pass the intersection without properly checking the plaintiff's vehicle in transit. The defendant's negligence caused the accident in this case. On the other hand, the defendant's driver was found to temporarily stop the vehicle before entering the intersection and check the absence of the vehicle, while the driver of the defendant's vehicle was running the intersection slowly, but the accident in this case is that the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle proceeds to the above intersection without temporarily stopping or leaving the intersection.