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. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with respect to C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On April 1, 2019, on April 12:26, 2019, the Plaintiff’s vehicle left to the left at four lanes (service and left turn turn) from among the five-lane roads near the latter part of the building in Yangcheon-gu Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, the accident occurred where the Defendant’s vehicle was in a three-lane (exclusive road sign) while the fronter on the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle and the rearer on the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

Due to the instant accident, KRW 1,840,00 (excluding self-charges) was paid at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,840,000 insurance money to the insured on April 12, 2019 according to the instant insurance contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5 through 12, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding along the left-hand turn line, and the Defendant’s vehicle was left the left-hand turn and the instant accident occurred. As such, the instant accident occurred due to the total negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 1,840,000 to the insured in accordance with the instant insurance contract, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the said money and the damages for delay to the Plaintiff claimed by subrogationing the insured.

B. The plaintiff's appeal asserting that the plaintiff's vehicle did not go slowly before entering the intersection, and that the plaintiff's error of entering the crosswalk before entering the intersection was caused by the accident of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's appeal claiming that there was no negligence on the part of the plaintiff's vehicle is groundless.

3. Determination

A. Examining the above evidence and the purport of the whole pleadings, the case is examined.