The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to vehicles with C lowest Pest Pest, and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to vehicles with D Rest.

B. On December 13, 2017, the driver E of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is crossing the road without permission while driving on one lane among the two-lane roads in Seopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si on December 13, 2017.

G (hereinafter referred to as “the Deceased”) was shocked to the right-hand part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to go beyond the two-lanes of the Deceased, and the Defendant’s driver H was going beyond the two-lanes.

On December 16, 2017, the deceased died as a multi-presidential part around 06:14, on the ground of the instant accident.

(c)

Plaintiff

The E driver of a vehicle and H driver of a defendant vehicle were indicted for committing a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Death) and was sentenced from the Jeju District Court on June 18, 2019 to 1 year of imprisonment without prison labor, 2 years of suspended execution, H was sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment without prison labor and 1 year of suspended execution.

However, on December 18, 2019, the Gwangju High Court, which is the legal ground of the appeal in the instant case, was negligent by the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in violation of the restricted speed, but has a substantial relation between the violation of the restricted speed and the death of the deceased.

It is insufficient to recognize that the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle had a duty of care to avoid the accident by predicting that the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle would appear on the road at the time of the accident.

For reasons of insufficient recognition, the defendant driver was found not guilty, and the driver of the defendant vehicle was also without permission.

The deceased has a duty of care to avoid an accident by predicting the collision between one lane and another and being used in a two-lane.

For lack of recognition, innocence was pronounced.

The judgment of the appellate court became final and conclusive thereafter.

(d)

The plaintiff paid 15,093,350 won to the deceased's medical expenses, and paid 200 million won to the deceased's heir on February 11, 2020 and paid damages.