1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to BG halog vehicles owned by A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the insurer who has concluded the automobile insurance contract with respect to C4.5 tons of trucks (hereinafter “Defendant’s automobile”).

B. On November 19, 2012, around 15:10 on November 19, 2012, there was an accident of collision between the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the lower part of the Defendant’s right-hand side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which proceeded with a two-lane from the way of the way of the way of the way of the way of the way of the way of the way of the two-lane.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

The location of the accident in this case is a second line, which enters a sex line from the calendar as a monthly base, with the first lane lost from the point of the accident in this case, and the two lanes are reduced to one lane. The defendant's vehicle proceeding with the first lane at the time tried to change its course into the second lane to the one to which the difference decreased.

With respect to the instant accident, the Plaintiff spent KRW 984,00 on March 18, 2013 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

【Unsatisfy-based dispute on the basis of recognition】less-founded facts, Gap evidence 1-1-3, 5-7, Eul evidence 1, 6, and 7-2, Gap evidence 1-4, 2-2, Eul evidence 2, 3, and 4-1, 2-1, 3, and 4-2, each of the images and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The occurrence and scope of the right of indemnity;

A. In light of the degree of collision of both vehicles at the time of the instant accident recognized by the evidence prior to the occurrence of the liability for damages and the limitation thereof in light of the type of the vehicle at the point at which the accident occurred, the situation of damage after the accident, etc., the instant accident ought to be deemed to be caused by the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the part of the Defendant, where the Defendant had changed the course to a two-lane without properly checking the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which had been driving the two-lanes, and the difference between the negligence of the vehicle on the part of the Defendant, which had changed to a two-lanes, is reduced, and where the Defendant’s vehicle’s attitude, which had to be changed