1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendants are the defendants.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. B, around 00:00 on November 15, 2013, driven by C AbdobdoD (hereinafter “Class 1”), and driven by C Abdodom D from the east side of Abdom to the Ropo-dong, the “F without permission crossing from the right side of the said vehicle to the left side, while driving along one lane from the east side of Abdom to the Ropo-dong. Around November 15, 2013, she received the front-way part of the said vehicle and had F go beyond the one-lane of the opposite road.

(hereinafter referred to as “pre-use vehicle”). (b)

After the preceding accident, Defendant A driven G rocketing (hereinafter referred to as “Second Vehicle”) and proceeded in the direction opposite to the first vehicle in the direction of the said accident site, followed by the attached Form No. F’s left-hand bridge part of the F that was going beyond the road (hereinafter referred to as “after-accident”) on the top of the left-hand side. In addition, Defendant A suffered an injury, such as the upper-hand pelle, etc.

C. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the first vehicle, and the Defendant Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance”) is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the second vehicle.

From March 10, 2014 to May 3, 2016, the Plaintiff paid F totaling KRW 12,682,630 to F with insurance proceeds in the name of medical expenses.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries and images of Gap's evidence 1 to 4, 6 through 13, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, the establishment of joint tort liability and the existence of causation between the injury of the F and the injury of the F, Defendant A recognized that the left-hand side part of the F was sufficient and the investigation agency also submitted a written statement to the same effect. The latter event occurred after Defendant A discovered the F, which was at the latest on the road after the occurrence of the preceding accident, and operated the steering gear at the right side, but instead did not avoid it.