1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

At the time of the accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle following the three-lane of the collision situation of the Defendant’s vehicle CD at the time of the accident at the time of lighting the location of 10:23 December 2017, 2017, in order to change the two-lanes to three-lanes of the road in front of the E Apartment Fdong at the time of lighting the location of the vehicle. The Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was moving from the two-lanes to the three-lanes, attempted to avoid it. The Plaintiff’s vehicle, who paid the insurance money to the other vehicle prior to the two-lanes, 350,000 won (the cost of repairing the vehicle in front of the two-lanes), the payment of the insurance money to the vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the 350,00 won (the cost of repairing the vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the two-lanes), has no dispute over

2. In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the fault ratio of the original Defendant’s vehicle in the instant accident is 70% of the Plaintiff’s vehicle: 30% of the Defendant’s vehicle.

① At the time, the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle attempted to change the course from the two lanes to the three-lanes (it does not seem that the Defendant’s vehicle at the time, like the Plaintiff’s assertion, attempted to make an abnormal round in the excessive situation of the three-lane intersection), but found the Plaintiff’s vehicle following the three-lane, and led the Plaintiff to the course while driving along the vehicle.

In addition, even though the plaintiff's vehicle had been relatively adequate to the extent that it faces with prior vehicles after excessive payment of the defendant's vehicle, the plaintiff's vehicle seems to have been unable to avoid prior vehicles because it turns off through snow paths.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the instant accident caused the Plaintiff’s primary negligence, which caused the Plaintiff’s driver’s negligence, by neglecting the speed without reducing the speed in the situation where the road is sleeped due to snow.

② However, it is reasonable to view the fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle to the extent of 30% in light of the above facts, where the Defendant’s driver committed an error of attempting to change the course toward the two-lanes. In addition, the accident was the cause of the accident.

3. Conclusion, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 105,00 = The plaintiff.