1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the owner of the Plaintiff’s sealed vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the owner of the Plaintiff’s automobile B (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).

B. On January 22, 2017, in the Olympic Games, which is a motorway near Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was dissatisfyed on the iceway and a collision accident occurred on the side side gate of the right side (hereinafter “first accident”), and the Defendant’s vehicle was dissatisfyed to avoid this, leading to the collision between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and Done Starex (hereinafter “second accident”).

C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 1,711,870 in total between February 2, 2017 to March 2017, and KRW 6,381,00 in the repair cost for the damage to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which occurred from the foregoing accident, as the medical expenses and the amount agreed upon by the Plaintiff’s passenger, and KRW 6,381,00 in each insurance money.

[Grounds for recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's second accident occurred due to the previous negligence of the driver of the defendant's vehicle, which is the insurer, the defendant is liable to pay the insurance money paid by the plaintiff due to the second accident.

The amount is 855,935 won in total and 652,700 won in the left door of the Plaintiff vehicle for 50% of the insurance money paid to E (50% of the contribution of the second accident to the injury of E) and 1,508,635 won in total.

3. In light of the following circumstances that can be seen by comprehensively taking into account the respective descriptions and images of evidence Nos. 2, 3, 7, 8, and 9 (including paper numbers), the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit, since the negligence of the Defendant’s driver in relation to the second accident cannot be recognized.

Plaintiff

The vehicle is driving in a two-lane as of the fourth-lane of the Olympic Games, resulting in the ice sprinking along the right side, and the vehicle is again in conflict with the two-lanes.