1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff equivalent to the amount ordered to be additionally paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D Cargo Vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

B. On June 24, 2019, around 05:57, the Defendant’s vehicle moved to the left-hand turn at the intersection of a three-distance crossing near the Incheon Gyeyang-gu Incheon apartment. On the opposite side, the part of the Plaintiff’s left-way front-way part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which was driven to the right-hand side of the direction, was shocked by the front-way part of the Defendant’s vehicle.

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

On June 28, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,841,00 as insurance money after deducting KRW 200,000 of the self-paid cost for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the plaintiff's claim for indemnity

A. In light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the above recognized facts and the evidence as above, the place where the accident in this case occurred is a three-distance crossing from the center line to the side of the road, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is found to have stopped by discovering the Defendant’s vehicle entering the road to the left-hand turn from the opposite side to the right side while avoiding the illegally parked vehicle on the right side of the road, and the Defendant’s vehicle seems to have been stopped without properly recognizing the existence of the Plaintiff vehicle stopping on the opposite side while entering the road to the left-hand turn at the Sam-distance intersection. In light of the above, the accident in this case is deemed to have occurred due to the negligence of the Defendant’s driver, and thus, the Defendant’s driver is obliged to compensate for all damages of the Plaintiff’s owner caused by the accident in this case.

B. Defendant vehicle according to the Defendant’s duty of reimbursement.