1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

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 respect to the vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) on the vehicle B (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 31, 2014, at around 22:58, the Plaintiff’s vehicle moved along the four-lane road in front of the entrance of the Daejeon Seo-gu Daejeon Highway and the Acheon Expressway, along the one-lane, into the new Ixan Ixan Ixan. On the other hand, the Defendant’s vehicle, which was placed on the one-lane following the breakdown, was shocked into the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

On November 6, 2014, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,189,870 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident of this case was caused by the unilateral negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle who left the site while leaving the site without taking any safety measure, and thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the above repair cost amounting to KRW 1,189,870 and the delay damages.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case occurred as the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff vehicle who neglected his duty of care in front of the week and the negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle due to the failure of safety measures, etc., and the negligence ratio is equivalent to 8:2. Thus, the defendant's claim for reimbursement exceeding

B. The following circumstances, namely, the fact of the recognition as above and the evidence revealed by the Defendant’s driver at the time of the instant accident, including the installation of identification signs, etc. to prevent traffic accidents on the rear side of the Defendant’s vehicle, did not take any particular measures to inform the Defendant’s vehicle of the fact that the Defendant’s vehicle was in front at the time of the instant accident.