1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claims extended by this court are all dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to C vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”). The Defendant is a mutual aid business operator with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

B. On December 7, 2018, at around 23:15, the Plaintiff’s vehicle began to change its bus lines to two lanes while driving along the direction of the departure site depending on the two-lane access roads from the Incheon International Airport Terminal Authority located in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

The defendant vehicle was driving in the same direction from the front side of the plaintiff vehicle in accordance with the same direction. The plaintiff vehicle discovered the change of the vehicle to the second one, and started to overtake the plaintiff vehicle by changing the vehicle to the first one.

However, at the time when the Defendant’s vehicle adjoins to the side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the Plaintiff’s vehicle changed the vehicle to a single lane on its own, and in the process, the lower part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle conflict.

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

According to the instant accident, Nonparty E, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, suffered injury, such as “the base and tension of the lux, the lux of the lux, the lux of the lux of the lux, and the lux of the lux of the lux of the lux of the lux of the lux of the lux of the

During the period from December 19, 2018 to March 14, 2019, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,515,60, totaling KRW 3,585,90 (= KRW 2,070,300, KRW 1,515,600) after deducting KRW 378,00 from the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle under the pretext of the treatment costs and agreement for the injury suffered by the instant accident.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8; Eul evidence No. 1; F's inquiry results; the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the negligence ratio between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle regarding the instant accident is 30:70.