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. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement with D limited partnership companies and E-si (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the owner and driver of F personal taxi (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”), and the Intervenor joining the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement with the Defendant regarding the Defendant vehicle.

B. On November 12, 2017, the Defendant driving the Defendant’s vehicle at around 06:10, driving the front side of the Seo-gu in Gwangju Seo-gu, in the H room to a shooting distance, and driving the said road at H level from the shooting distance room in the Seo-gu Fire Station. On the other hand, I driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle, driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and driving the said one lane behind the Defendant’s vehicle.

피고 차량은 비상등을 켠 채 위 도로의 1차로 및 2차로에 걸쳐 진행하던 중 2차로로 차로를 변경하다가 다시 1차로로 들어오는 과정에서 피고 차량의 좌측 부분으로 위 도로 1차로를 진행하고 있던 원고 차량의 우측 부분을 충격하여 원고 차량 승객인 J이 상해를 입게 되었다

(See attached Form No. 300, hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

From November 22, 2017 to December 20, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,115,890 in total as the J’s medical expenses and the amount agreed upon.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s vehicle had been changed from the first lane to the second lane, and that caused the instant accident in the course of entering the second lane in order to make the second illegal internship. The Plaintiff’s driver was not able to anticipate the above movement of the Defendant’s vehicle as well as the Defendant’s vehicle could not avoid the Defendant’s vehicle. Thus, the instant accident occurred due to the Defendant’s fault at 10%.

Therefore, the defendant, who is the owner and driver of the defendant vehicle, is the plaintiff of this case.