1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff ordering payment is revoked.

The defendant is against the plaintiff 920.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. With respect to Dsi owned by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement on the E-vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”) with respect to the E-vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. At around 10:20 on December 21, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle were waiting in order to make a right-hand way from the right-way lane of 30 Western-dong, Jung-gu, Incheon.

The defendant vehicle temporarily stops on the side of the right side of the vehicle of the plaintiff vehicle while the vehicle of the plaintiff vehicle temporarily stops on the two-lanes prior to the right side of the right side (the right side of the vehicle of the plaintiff vehicle). While the vehicle of the plaintiff is moving on the right side of the vehicle of the plaintiff vehicle, the front side of the vehicle of the plaintiff vehicle is shocked to the right side of the vehicle of the plaintiff vehicle, and the right side side of the vehicle of the plaintiff vehicle is pushed ahead

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

From January 25, 2018 to January 31, 2018, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 6,137,000 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as "repair costs of this case"). / [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap's video and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s instant accident is an accident attributable to the Plaintiff’s failure to drive the Defendant’s driver, where the Defendant’s vehicle was too small-sized container freight but still stopped.

Therefore, since this is an accident caused by the total negligence of Defendant vehicle, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the full amount of the repair cost of this case.

B. The Defendant’s vehicle was in front at the time of waiting in order to circumvent the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle immediately before the instant accident. Since the Defendant’s vehicle entered the front, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor should have taken into account that the Defendant’s vehicle is a large container freight.