1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

At the time of the accident, on November 10, 2017, at the time of the accident, the part front of the plaintiff's vehicle that left at the right side of the defendant's vehicle, which was left left at the two-lanes of the head office of the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Maamba-dong-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s driver of the Defendant’s vehicle operated the steering gear on the two-lane side while left the left at the three-lane and received the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the normal left-hand turn at the two-lane, so the instant accident occurred by the previous negligence of the Defendant’s driver.

B. The Defendant’s vehicle was in normal left-hand turn in the three-lane, and the Plaintiff’s driver tried to go straight in the two-lanes, and received the rear part of the Defendant’s vehicle, so the instant accident occurred due to the previous negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver.

3. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence supra, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident occurred by the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver.

① The Defendant’s vehicle stops at the front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle are faced.

② Although the left turn is not left at the location of the instant accident, it seems unreasonable to turn to the left at the same time from three lanes to cross-sections.

The defendant's vehicle is confirmed to turn to the left at the three-lanes in the same direction as that of the preceding two-lanes, and unlike the plaintiff's assertion.