beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
[Claim]
Reasons
1. At the time of the occurrence of the basic fact-finding accident, under the situation that the defendant vehicle entered the right-hand side of the instant accident where the vehicle of this case entered the instant accident site where the vehicle of this case was a three-lane road at around May 11, 2019 at the time when the insured vehicle of this case (hereinafter referred to as “the instant accident site”) D (including the time when the driver is referred to as “the plaintiff vehicle”) and the driver of the insured vehicle of this case (hereinafter referred to as “the driver of this case”), the plaintiff vehicle is proceeding beyond the front stop line of the crosswalk, and the amount of the insurance money paid for the accident insurance money of this case where the vehicle of this case was shocked on May 29, 2019, the following particulars are as follows:
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-6, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff's summary of the plaintiff's assertion asserts that the accident of this case is attributable to one's unilateral negligence caused by the violation of signal signals by the defendant's vehicle, because the defendant's vehicle crossings over the front stop line of the red-fluence on the two-lanes, facing the plaintiff's vehicle stopped in front of the crosswalk.
B. (1) In light of the following circumstances, the instant accident occurred concurrently between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle’s negligence, and it is reasonable to view that the fault ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle was 80:20 in relation to the instant accident, in light of the following circumstances, such as the characteristics of the instant accident site, the background of the accident, the degree of collision, and the degree of shock.
In light of the video, the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not stop the vehicle’s moving signal in front of the crosswalk, which is the instant accident place, even though it is changed to a red signal through yellow signal.