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

The defendant.

1. The circumstances leading up to the instant accident are as follows.

On November 1, 2018 at the time of the accident, the insured vehicle CD of the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff at the time of the accident, and the vehicle in the situation of road collision near the 14-14 East-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s instant accident occurred due to the full negligence of the Defendant’s driver crossinging the road that is not allowed to cross, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the full amount of the repair cost paid by the Plaintiff who acquired the claim for damages by subrogation of the insurer.

B. The Defendant’s instant accident occurred due to the Plaintiff’s gross negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver of the instant vehicle, who had entered the intersection and had been passing through the intersection but failed to properly examine the direction for temporary suspension without neglecting the direction. As such, in calculating the amount of damages caused by the instant accident, the said negligence by the Plaintiff’s driver should be considered.

3. Determination

A. According to the facts acknowledged in the above basic facts, and each of the above evidence, in particular, the entry of Gap evidence 7, and Eul evidence 3, the location of the accident in this case is a road where one-lane passage is installed, and the driver of the defendant vehicle is not an intersection. However, the accident in this case occurred.