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 entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with C on D SP car (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), which is its owner, and the Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with E on FM vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. G, a spouse of C, was driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle on September 6, 2018 at around 10:00, while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driving the four-lane 4 way in the G, J, J, J, J, J, J, as one-lane, into the 10-lane square square in the desired intersection, depending on one-lane.

C. The signal apparatus at the front intersection of the Plaintiff vehicle was affixed with a sign to turn to the left or walk signal to the front intersection. However, G attempted to turn to the front intersection in violation of the signal, even though the signal at the front intersection was red signal, and the driver of the Defendant vehicle E, in violation of the red signal, went to the intersection and proceeded to the first lane from three lanes to one lane on the opposite lane of the Plaintiff vehicle, and in violation of the signal, the driver of the Defendant vehicle conflict with the Plaintiff vehicle at the one lane.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). D.

Until September 21, 2018, the Plaintiff paid C totaling KRW 1,920,000 in the name of the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in accordance with the foregoing accident.

[Basis] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, Eul evidence No. 1-2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, and 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident of this case is not only the negligence of the plaintiff driver G in violation of the signal, but also the negligence of the defendant driver E in violation of the signal, and since the negligence ratio of the defendant driver E is equivalent to 50%, the defendant is liable to pay 50% of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff.

As to this, the defendant's vehicle was in contravention of the signal, but the vehicle on the left-hand side of the direction of the defendant's vehicle.