1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B multi-user vehicles with respect to B multi-user vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

B. At around 11:50 on October 21, 2014, the Defendant’s vehicle shocked the front part of the driver’s seat on the front part of the Defendant’s seat on the front part of the driver’s seat of the Plaintiff vehicle, which was lowered from the front line of the entrance of the arm’s length of Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, with no central line, for delivery. In order to deliver, the Defendant’s vehicle shocked the front part of the driver’s seat on the front part of the Defendant vehicle.

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

On November 20, 2014, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 7,420,000 at the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred due to the unilateral negligence of the defendant's driver of the defendant's vehicle who found the plaintiff's vehicle late and shocked due to disregarding the accident, even though there was a space to avoid on the right side of the road. Thus, the defendant is obliged to pay the above insurance money and the damages for delay in response to the plaintiff's claim.

The defendant asserts that the driver of the plaintiff vehicle is negligent in not operating on the right side of the road.

3. The following circumstances revealed by the above facts of recognition and the evidence revealed, namely, the Defendant’s vehicle continued to proceed by getting up the bendway along the direction around the view of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle stopped at the night around the view of the vehicle, while the road in which the instant accident occurred was set off by the center line, and the vehicle of the Defendant’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle driving in both direction, although the road in which the instant accident occurred was set off by the center line.