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.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to Ara-car (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff-car”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to XG car (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant-car”).

Plaintiff

On March 2, 2015, the driver of the vehicle driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the private street intersection (hereinafter “instant intersection”) around 301-dong, Seosung-dong, Seosung-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “Seongdong”) around 13:15, and cutting 301 square meters of spring water in the vicinity of the 301-dong, Seosung-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant intersection”) and driving the Defendant’s vehicle into the right side of the instant intersection with the pentle and the pentle part of the Plaintiff’s left side.

(hereinafter “instant accident.” On March 25, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 600,000 insurance money (excluding KRW 200,000,000, out of KRW 800,000) to the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as the repair cost, etc. of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

The Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for deliberation of the car insurance dispute deliberation committee, and the said committee decided 70% of the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and 30% of the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the Defendant paid 240,000 won (80,000 won x 0.3) to the Plaintiff on October 14, 2015, an amount equivalent to 30% of the negligence ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 8 (including virtual numbers), Eul evidence 1, 2, 3, 6, and 8's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's assertion of the plaintiff's assertion that the defendant's vehicle passes the intersection of the above shooting distance, and the plaintiff's claim of judgment changed the fleet from the first lane to the second lane, and suspended the fleet to the second lane, and started again, the plaintiff's vehicle was shocked to the other plaintiff's vehicle which was temporarily stopped and temporarily stopped.

Therefore, the accident of this case is needed for the driver of the defendant vehicle to change the lane.