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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff’s B rental car (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s car”) owned by A, with respect to Dchip car owned by C (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).

B. On May 14, 2016, around 12:12 on May 14, 2016, A made a left turn to the left at the intersection near the E-U.S. located in Bupyeong-gu, Ocheon-gu, U.S., the Defendant’s vehicle driving on the Plaintiff’s vehicle from the opposite lane was making a right turn to the left, and the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was shocked by the front part in front of the left part of the Defendant

(hereinafter referred to as the "accident of this case") shall be referred to as the "accident of this case, and the map (Evidence A 2) at the site of the accident shall be as shown in the attached Form.

On May 25, 2016, the Plaintiff, as an insurer A, paid KRW 2,550,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, and 8, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s vehicle is a traffic accident caused by the Defendant’s unilateral negligence, inasmuch as the instant accident occurred as the Defendant’s vehicle, which was proceeding on the opposite lane while driving at the normal left-hand turn pursuant to the new subparagraph, was changing the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to a large radius and did not properly look at the right-hand and right-hand side of the vehicle.

The insurer under the Commercial Act seeks to pay the amount equivalent to the repair cost by subrogation of the insurer.

(2) The instant accident occurred due to the collision between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle’s fault and the accident that occurred while the Defendant’s vehicle was bypass and turn to the left at a large radius from the part adjacent to the Defendant’s vehicle, and the left right turn to the left two-lane. The negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle is either 40% or less.

B. According to Article 25 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the driver of any motor vehicle intends to make a right side of the road in advance when the driver intends to make a right side through the intersection.