1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the following additional payment order shall be revoked.

1. On December 20, 2017, at the time of the occurrence of the basic fact-finding accident, the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle CD at the time of the insured vehicle, the insured vehicle, at the location of the accident in front of the building in front of the wife population E at the location of the location on December 16:38, 2017, left the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the two-lanes of the vehicle in front of the building in front of the building in front of the road, and shocked Nonparty F (hereinafter referred to as “victim”) who was standing on the immediately preceding three lanes of the vehicle in the Defendant Taekwondo who stopped at the crosswalk. The amount of the insurance money paid to KRW 29,347,520.

A. The circumstances surrounding the instant accident are as follows.

B. In the instant accident, the first instance court sentenced the Plaintiff to the negligence ratio of the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver, and sentenced the Defendant to the payment of KRW 2,934,752, which is 10% of the insurance money paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff, and the damages for delay.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) In light of the fact that the defendant's alleged vehicle stops illegally in the vicinity of the crosswalk where the parking prohibition zone is placed, leaving the victim at a dangerous place, obstructing the driver's view of the vehicle, causing the accident of this case. The defendant's vehicle carrying the plaintiff's age leading students of a nive driving school substantially negligent in his duty to protect the victim, thereby causing the accident of this case, at least 30% of the fault of the defendant's vehicle in relation to the accident of this case must be recognized. 2) When the defendant's alleged school bus stops on the road and operates a device such as on-and-off light indicating that children or infants are getting on or off, the driver of the vehicle driving along the lane where the school bus stops and the driver of the vehicle driving along the lane immediately adjacent to the road of this case shall temporarily stop before reaching the school bus and check the safety of the plaintiff's vehicle (Article 51 (1) of the Road Traffic Act).