1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and the appeal shall be 1.

1. Basic facts

A. The circumstances surrounding the instant accident are as follows.

At the time of the accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the situation of the collision between the road near the building in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City at a place around April 12:35, 2020 on the day CD of the Plaintiff’s insurance relationship (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) was proceeding along the intersection with the one lane of the above road. However, the Defendant’s vehicle, while moving to the right side of the vehicle in the direction of the Plaintiff’s proceeding, has obstructed the first lane

B. The instant accident requires KRW 1,276,220, totaling KRW 1,167,70, and KRW 108,520,00 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and KRW 108,520 for the daily leave of absence.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's vehicle has violated the signal by the plaintiff's vehicle because the signal to the front intersection is changed by yellow signal after the plaintiff's vehicle enters the intersection.

It is not possible to see that the accident of this case occurred by the unilateral negligence of the defendant vehicle because the defendant vehicle could not see that the accident of this case occurred because it was caused by the one-time negligence of the plaintiff vehicle while breaking the one-lane.

In this regard, even though it is obvious that the Plaintiff’s vehicle has already been changed to a yellow signal at the time of entering the intersection, the Defendant had been negligent in passing through the intersection at an rapid speed and shocking the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of entering the intersection.

The argument is asserted.

B. In light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned facts of recognition, namely, the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s heavy bypassing the Defendant’s vehicle and the entire purport of the pleadings, whereas on the other hand, the Plaintiff’s vehicle appears to have already changed by yellow signal at the time of entering the intersection; the speed of the Defendant vehicle at the time of the entry into the intersection and other circumstances indicated in the record, and the degree of conflict and shock, etc., the instant accident is committed by the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle.