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. On October 16, 2018, C driven the E-vehicle owned by D (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) (hereinafter “instant intersection”) around 21:35 on October 16, 2018, in order to move from F to the G market at the right side of H vehicles proceeding in the same direction on the right side of H vehicles running in the same direction (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”) and the right side of the Plaintiff vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. The Plaintiff paid KRW 2,57,000,000, out of KRW 2,757,000, out of the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, as the insurer that entered into an automobile insurance contract with D with respect to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, until November 8, 2018.

C. The defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract for the defendant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to Gap 6 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to Eul 5 evidence (the evidence with a provisional number includes a branch number), images, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred between the parties (A) is an accident where the Defendant’s vehicle on the right lane, even though the Plaintiff’s vehicle is going to go to the intersection of this case, is going to the intersection in which the change of lanes is prohibited, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle is going to the lane in which the vehicle is going to the intersection in which the change of lanes is prohibited, and the Plaintiff’s previous negligence occurs.

Since the Plaintiff paid insurance money for the damage incurred to the Plaintiff, pursuant to Article 682 of the Commercial Act, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the insurance money that the Plaintiff paid to the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant's argument in this case is divided into three lanes before crossing, and four lanes after crossing, and the defendant's vehicle was moving from three lanes before entering the intersection to three lanes after entering the intersection, but was moving to two lanes.