1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The circumstances leading up to the instant accident are as follows.

At the time of the accident, the whole part of the driver's seat of the Defendant Insured Vehicle A, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff at the time of the accident, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff at the time of the accident, on September 25, 2017, and around 17:5, 2017, on September 25, 2017, the part of the driver's seat of the Defendant Insured Vehicle of the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant Vehicle") at the time of the accident, which was in the two lanes from the two lanes to the two lanes of the two lanes, has been changed from the one to the two lanes of the two lanes, and the part of the driver's seat of the Defendant Insured Vehicle of the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant Vehicle") at the time of the accident, was paid for shock insurance money of KRW 461,100,00 in front of the left side of the Plaintiff's vehicle, and there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap's evidence Nos.

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant accident occurred concurrently with the fault of the Defendant’s driver, and that the negligence is 40% of the insurance proceeds paid by the Plaintiff, and claimed 184,440 won, which is 40% of the insurance proceeds paid by the Plaintiff, and damages for delay from the day following the final payment date. Accordingly, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s negligence by the Plaintiff’s driver exceeds the fault of the Defendant’s driver.

In a case where intending to see the left-hand turn, right-hand turn, cross-turn, administrative land, or back or to change course while proceeding in the same direction, the driver of any motor vehicle shall use his hand, direction indicator, or light until the act is completed (Article 38(1) of the Road Traffic Act). The driver of any motor vehicle shall not change course when it is likely to impede normal traffic of other motor vehicles running in the direction of change when intending to change course of the motor vehicle (Article 19(3) of the Road Traffic Act). According to the above acknowledged facts and the evidence revealed earlier, the accident of this case is caused by negligence by changing the course without thoroughly examining the speed, etc. of the Defendant motor vehicle traveling along the two lanes.