1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that entered into an automobile mutual aid agreement with respect to C Freight Vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer that entered into an automobile insurance agreement with respect to D Freight Vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On October 23, 2017, around 06:20 on October 23, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driving along the three-lanes of the road, which was driven along the intersection of the private road, from the southwest-gu Seoul Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul, to the slope of the private road.

The defendant's vehicle driven several lanes prior to the plaintiff's vehicle at the time, and when the vehicle signal apparatus of the moving direction has changed to red lights, the previous vehicle stopped two lanes and three lanes in order to damage the previous vehicle, and stopped from the four lanes.

At this time, while changing the course from the three-lane to the four-lane, the Plaintiff’s front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was shocked to the rear part of the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. The Defendant paid KRW 4,392,000 at the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle according to the instant accident.

The Defendant filed an application for deliberation and coordination of the instant accident with the E Deliberation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Deliberation Committee”).

On February 5, 2018, the Deliberation Committee deliberated on February 5, 2018, determined the ratio of liability between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle to 90% by taking into account the location of the suspension and drilling of the Defendant’s vehicle.

E. On February 27, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,952,800 (=4,392,000 x 0.9) to the Defendant according to the above decision.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, 5, 6 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 5 (including each number), the video, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. In view of the fact that the Defendant vehicle alleged by the Plaintiff changed its course from the two-lane to the four-lane, and the Plaintiff vehicle was difficult to anticipate the four-lane entry of the Defendant vehicle, the fault ratio of the Defendant vehicle shall reach 50%.