1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of BDap Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to CKaz vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 21, 2014, around 07:35, there was an accident that conflicts between the entire right side of the Plaintiff vehicle and the left side of the Defendant vehicle, which was directly related to the lower-hand side of the Plaintiff vehicle, at the Sam-distance Intersection located in 358, Mag-ro, Mag-ro, the Kimhae-si (hereinafter “instant accident”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 7-1 and Eul evidence 7-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant vehicle operated in a state where he neglected to temporarily stop on the right side line of the side streets without temporarily suspending, while using the mobile phone, and caused damage to the plaintiff vehicle by shocking the right side pent, horizontal, and pande, which was left left on the side side streets.

B. It is not enough to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant’s vehicle used the mobile phone and operated it in a state where it neglected to use the mobile phone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

However, in full view of all the circumstances, including the background of the instant accident, the damaged part of each vehicle, and the fact that the Defendant recognized the fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle as 10%, the instant accident is deemed to have occurred by the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle, and it is reasonable to regard the fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle as 10% in the instant accident, and thus, the Defendant’s liability is limited to 10%.

Furthermore, in light of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 1,213,805 per the instant accident is recognized in light of health class, Gap’s evidence No. 3 as to the amount of damages.