1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim as to the above cancellation part is dismissed.

1. The circumstances leading up to the instant accident are as follows.

On July 14, 2017, 08:10 on July 14, 2017 at the time of the insured vehicle A, the insured vehicle, and the insured vehicle, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff at the time of the accident, at the time of the accident, left left-hand part of the left-hand part of the insured vehicle in the front part of the left-hand part of the insured vehicle, where the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff and the insured vehicle of the Defendant were at the time of the accident, were at the time of the accident, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff at the time of the accident, and at the time of the third line in the location of the claim distance collision at the location of the new-dong-dong, Daegu-dong, Daegu-dong, Daegu-gu, and the purport of the entire arguments and arguments as follows.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred due to the unilateral negligence of the driver of the insured vehicle, and claimed the full amount of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff and damages for delay from the day following the final payment date. The defendant asserts that the accident in this case occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the insured vehicle.

First, I examine the argument that the negligence of the defendant insured vehicle is 100%.

In light of all the circumstances, such as the fact of recognition and the background of the accident, the degree of conflict, and the degree of shock, it is reasonable to deem that the driver of the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle was at least 45% of the accident of this case. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

(1) The insured vehicle driver’s liability ratio for the instant accident to the extent of 0% to 55% cannot affect the conclusion of the instant case as seen below. As such, the Plaintiff’s insurance proceeds of this case were paid based on the security for self-vehicle damage, and the insurer’s security for self-vehicle damage up to the point of time against the occurrence of the insurance accident.