1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As to the Plaintiff’s vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurance company that concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle B (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).

B. At around 17:10 on April 30, 2016, the Defendant’s vehicle driven in the reverse direction of the driving direction marked on the floor of the instant parking lot, such as one vehicle indicated in attached Table 1 in the “accident Site Map” at the 1B parking lot (hereinafter “instant parking lot”), which is an amusement facility located in the valley-Eup’s agency of the wife population, the Defendant’s vehicle, as indicated in attached Table 1-2 of the above attached Table 1, was driven in the reverse direction of the instant parking lot. In order to enter the instant parking lot from the instant parking lot to the 1A parking lot, as shown in attached Table 1-2 of the above, the part of the above side gate in front of the Plaintiff’s driver’s seat, which was driven in the direction of the main direction indicated on the floor of the instant parking lot.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On June 15, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,471,640 (hereinafter “instant indemnity money”) to C, the insured of the Plaintiff vehicle, as insurance proceeds.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 8, Eul evidence 3, or the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred by shocking the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was driven in the direction of the direction of the driving and the opposite direction indicated on the instant parking lot by the driver of the Defendant vehicle. As such, the instant accident entirely occurred due to the Defendant vehicle’s negligence without complying with the driving direction indicated on the instant parking lot and violating the duty of the safe driving and the duty of the front direction.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the indemnity amount of KRW 2,471,640 and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s instant parking lot is the “road” under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Road Traffic Act.