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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”). The Defendant is a mutual aid association which entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to B buses (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicles”).

B. At around 17:20 on September 20, 2015, the Defendant vehicle run along the two lanes of the 5-lane road near the Suchip department store. While changing the vehicle from the 2-lane to the 5-lane, the Defendant vehicle shocked the left-hand side of the Plaintiff vehicle running along the three-lane to the right-hand side of the Defendant vehicle while changing the vehicle from the 2-lane to the 3-lane, the lower part of the C vehicle, which changed the vehicle from the 3-lane on the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle to the 4-lane on the right-hand side of the Plaintiff vehicle (hereinafter “victim”), was shocked into the right-hand side of the Plaintiff vehicle.

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

By January 19, 2016, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 910,100 in total for each repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and damaged vehicle caused by the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In light of the fact that the defendant vehicle at the time of the accident in this case, at the time of the change of the vehicle line, conflicts with the left-hand side of the plaintiff vehicle running along the vehicle's side with the right-hand side of the vehicle, it seems unreasonable that the defendant vehicle has changed the vehicle due to the fact that the vehicle did not secure sufficient distance with the plaintiff vehicle to the extent that the vehicle can change the vehicle line, and due to the above collision, the vehicle is pushed down with the damaged vehicle while the vehicle is pushed down. In light of the above, it is reasonable to view that the accident in this case was caused by the whole negligence of the defendant vehicle which attempted the change of the vehicle without properly checking the plaintiff vehicle.

3. Thus, the defendant, who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is the plaintiff's insurance money of KRW 910,100 and this shall be applied to the plaintiff.