1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to D business-use taxis (hereinafter “Plaintiff”). The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to E business-related taxi.

B. On May 14, 2018, in order to avoid the Defendant’s vehicle entering the intersection without temporarily suspending the signal lights in front of the Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F (hereinafter “instant intersection”), the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not temporarily enter the intersection and, at the same time, e.g., a coffee specialty point and frequency on the left left side of the front line in order to avoid the Defendant’s vehicle entering the intersection to temporarily stop and turn to the left.

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

On June 27, 2018, the Plaintiff finally paid KRW 1,952,440 to the Plaintiff vehicle passenger G, KRW 1,456,620 to H, KRW 2.66,620, KRW 2.6 million with the repair cost of the damaged goods, KRW 2.2 million with the repair cost of the coffee specialty, KRW 1,273,00 with the remuneration of Gangwon, KRW 9,482,060 with the remuneration of KRW 1,273,00.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff asserted the parties’ assertion (1) that, although the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident was negligent by entering the instant intersection without reducing the speed, the road on which the Plaintiff’s vehicle runs was larger than the road on which the Defendant’s vehicle runs, and that the Plaintiff’s vehicle first entered the said intersection to promote the intersection, the fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle constitutes 60%.

(2) The Defendant is a one-lane road for both the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle driving along, and there is an on-road parking lot on both sides of the Plaintiff’s vehicle. As such, the road driven by the Plaintiff’s vehicle cannot be seen as any more, and the Defendant’s vehicle runs along the instant intersection before entering the instant intersection, and is accelerating due to pedestrians crossing the crosswalk.