1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the Defendant’s KRW 2,144,955 as to the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from June 6, 2014 to August 30, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid operator who has entered into an automobile mutual aid contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On February 17, 2015, around 18:30 on February 17, 2015, the Plaintiff’s vehicle also changed the lane from the first lane to the second lane on the third lane, and the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the second lane to the third lane damaged the Plaintiff’s vehicle caused a traffic accident that conflicts with the driving seat of the E vehicle driving along the third lane (hereinafter “victim”).

C. By June 5, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,149,850 in total with medical expenses, etc. for the drivers of damaged vehicles and their passengers as repair expenses.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries or videos of Gap's evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. 판단 갑 제7 내지 12호증(가지번호 포함)의 각 기재 및 영상에 의하면, 원고 차량 운전자는 진행중이던 1차로의 전방이 좌회전 신호를 기다리는 차량으로 정체되어 있자 우측 방향지시등을 켬과 거의 동시에 2차로로 차로를 변경하였고, 피고 차량 운전자는 원고 차량 운전자가 방향지시등을 켠 이후에도 전혀 감속하지 않고 그대로 주행하던 중 이 사건 사고가 발생한 사실이 인정된다.

In full view of the above facts and the above facts, the accident in this case occurred by the driver of the plaintiff vehicle who changed the lane without due consideration of the traffic situation of the vehicle to enter, and on the other hand, the defendant vehicle was negligent by neglecting the duty of prior watching prior to the accident, even though it was possible to easily confirm the movement of the plaintiff vehicle because there was no element to obstruct the view at the time.