The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the insurer of C vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff vehicle”) including its driver, and the Defendant is the insurer of D vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”) including its driver.

B. On April 30, 2019, around 18:00, the Defendant’s vehicle running at four-lanes of the four-lanes in the 77 Gyeonggi-gu, Seowon-si, Seowon-si, Seowon-si, Seowon-si, Seowon-si, Seowon-si, 256, Seowon-si, the 77 Gyeonggi-gu, Seowon-gu, Seowon-si, the front side of the Defendant vehicle’s accompanying seat was driven by the front vehicle, depending on the front vehicle. After the Plaintiff’s right of the vehicle, the Plaintiff’s vehicle moved at the left side of the four-lane, leading the front side of the Defendant vehicle’s accompanying seat (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. The instant accident destroyed the Plaintiff’s vehicle. On June 28, 2019, the Plaintiff paid the insurance proceeds of KRW 1,248,700 calculated by deducting KRW 200,000 of the Plaintiff’s self-paid share from the total amount of damages at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 8, 10 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 5 (including branch numbers for those with serial numbers) and the purport of the whole of the images and arguments

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Both the Plaintiff and the Defendant asserted that the instant accident occurred from the whole negligence of the other party’s vehicle, but as seen thereafter, the instant accident occurred between the negligence of the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle, and thus, both the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s allegation are rejected.

B. According to the aforementioned facts and the evidence revealed earlier, the instant accident occurred by the negligence that the Plaintiff’s vehicle carried ahead of the Defendant’s front vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle carried in unreasonable manner, and by negligence that did not drive the Plaintiff’s vehicle despite being aware of the change in the course of the Plaintiff’s vehicle. It is reasonable to view that the negligence ratio between the Plaintiff’s and the Defendant’s vehicle is 60:40.

C. The repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the insured.