1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against the revoked part is dismissed.

2...

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's alleged driver of the defendant vehicle who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused by the accident of this case, since the accident of this case occurred as the accident of this case was caused by the wind that the driver of the defendant vehicle did not take relief measures after the accident of this case and the damage was expanded due to the wind that the driver of the vehicle of this case, who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is more than 30% of the negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle.

B. As the instant accident occurred at the wind of the Plaintiff’s assertion while under the influence of alcohol and left-hand turn, the instant accident was entirely caused by the Plaintiff’s negligence, and there was no negligence on the Defendant’s driver.

3. Determination

(a) A motor vehicle driver who operates a road along which a median line is installed along his/her own bus line is generally aware that the motor vehicle coming from a marina line is in compliance with his/her own bus line, and thus, barring any special circumstance that could anticipate the abnormal operation of the other motor vehicle, the other motor vehicle does not have a duty of care to expect the other motor vehicle to drive the motor vehicle until she intrudes into the median line.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da39158 delivered on January 24, 1997). B.

The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in relation to the above facts and the statements in Gap 2, 3, 4, 6, 14 through 25, 29, 30, 31, and Eul 1 through 4 (including various numbers), namely, ① the plaintiff's vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration 0.176% under the influence of alcohol level 0.176%, and caused the accident of this case to the right at a place other than the intersection, and ② the defendant's vehicle.