beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's incidental appeal and the defendant's appeal are all dismissed.
2. Costs arising from an appeal and an incidental appeal shall be respectively.
Reasons
1.The following facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in each entry or video set forth in Gap evidence 1 to 5 and 7 (including the branch numbers if any).
With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff vehicle), the Defendant is the insurer who has concluded each comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant vehicle).
B. Around 05:34 on May 31, 2014, the driver of the Defendant vehicle driving the Defendant vehicle and proceeding the road front of the Dridge C located in Suwon-si C (hereinafter “the road in this case”) from Samsung Electronic Preservation Area to the East Bhne, and immediately following the passage through the intersection of the shot road in the shot field (hereinafter “the intersection in this case”), the driver of the Defendant vehicle shocked the front part of the Plaintiff vehicle’s right side on the front part of the Defendant vehicle.
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). C.
Plaintiff
Vehicles were making a U-turn in the center of the instant road, and there was safety signs allowing U-turns on the surface of the first lane of the instant road, and there was no supplementary sign informing of the additional permissible time in the U-turn sign installed on the signal, etc. of the front intersection.
By December 4, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 29,365,000 in total to the repair company, etc. of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.
2. Assertion and determination
A. The Plaintiff 1’s assertion that the instant accident occurred in the U.S. section on the road of this case by the Plaintiff is the fault of the Plaintiff’s driver, who did not see the Defendant’s vehicle that was driven by the Plaintiff in the U.S. section on the road of this case, and the negligence by the Defendant’s driver, who was driven by the Defendant’s driver, who violated the restricted speed on the road of this case, led to the occurrence of the instant accident by competition between the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver.