1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of the claim.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Status 1 of the party concerned) The Plaintiff is C and D (hereinafter “Plaintiff”)

(2) The Defendant is an insurance company that has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the E vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 28, 2017, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the event of a traffic accident changed the two-lanes from the two-lanes to the three-lanes of the two-lanes in the intersection (including the bus exclusive lanes) in the intersection, while driving from the four-lanes of the common half-lanes of the common half-lanes in the common half-lanes of the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon.

Eind Defendant 1 was straight along the same direction as the Plaintiff’s vehicle and passed the intersection in the same direction.

Plaintiff

A driver of a vehicle has a duty to verify whether there is a vehicle that proceeds from the front, rear, and left well and left, and there is a duty to safely change the lane and prevent accidents, but he/she has failed to perform his/her duty of care and has caused a mistake in changing the lane

C. On November 3, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 694,000 to the repair cost and parts of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 5 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 4, video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle used the direction direction, etc. to turn on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and changed the vehicle line to check the entry into the three-lane distance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant and the driver of the vehicle were negligent in taking the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the negligence of neglecting the duty of front-time care and accident prevention measures.

It is reasonable to view that the negligence ratio of the driver of the Plaintiff and the driver of the Defendant, who contributed to the instant traffic accident, is 50:50.

Therefore, the defendant is more than 347,000 won (=694,000 won x 0.5) equivalent to the ratio of the fault of the defendant's vehicle out of the repair cost of the plaintiff's vehicle as compensation to the plaintiff.