1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On February 25, 2016, around 18:45, the Plaintiff’s vehicle conflicts with the Defendant’s vehicle that tried to turn to the left at the left at the left side of the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle when the intersection was in progress along the two-lanes of the 4-lanes of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seo-dong.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On March 10, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,122,00 as insurance money at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred due to the full negligence of the driver of the defendant's vehicle, so the defendant should pay 3,122,000 won of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff to the plaintiff as compensation for damages.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the defendant's negligence related to the accident of this case is 80%, which is merely 80% of the plaintiff's claim for reimbursement, the defendant cannot respond to the exceeding part of the defendant

B. As to the Defendant’s share of fault in relation to the instant accident, the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, namely, the intersection where the instant accident occurred is installed only in the direction of the Plaintiff’s driving, and there is no signal device in the direction of the driving of the Defendant’s driving vehicle. As such, the Defendant’s vehicle is a situation in which it is possible to directly drive or turn to the left only when the signal apparatus of the Plaintiff’s driving direction is a stop signal, and the Defendant’s vehicle entered the intersection at the time of the instant accident, deeming that the Defendant’s vehicle entered the intersection.