1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to Asch Rexroth vehicles (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff vehicle").

The defendant is in the position to be liable in accordance with the SOFA Agreement if the vehicle B of the United States (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant vehicle") causes a traffic accident by negligence.

The outline of the instant accident is as follows.

On April 28, 2014: Around 08:57 on April 28, 2014, the accident scene of the approach road to the Busan direction-setting road of the Gyeongdo Highway as Seoul Seocho-gu in Seocho-gu: C was driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driving it along the two-lanes of the above approach road. The Defendant’s vehicle was driving along one lane, but there was an accident that conflicts between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle in the area where each of the above lanes is combined.

Until January 14, 2017, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 13,157,580,00 in total, including KRW 2,957,580, and KRW 10,200 in the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

【In the absence of any dispute, the occurrence of liability to compensate for damages in determining the purport of the entire entries or images, pleadings, and the driver of any motor vehicle at the fault ratio shall not change course when it is likely to impede the normal passage of other motor vehicles running in the direction intended to change course of the motor vehicle (Article 19(3) of the Road Traffic Act). However, as in this case, it may be sufficiently anticipated that the motor vehicle at the entry line should be changed or combined with the entry line in the section where the two lanes are combined as one one. As such, the motor vehicle at the entry line as well as the motor vehicle at the entry line should be operated safely by checking the front direction so as not to cause any mutual conflict.

Based on these legal principles, at the time of the accident of this case, the defendant vehicle entered the lane from the entry lane to the main lane, and the plaintiff vehicle was driving along the main lane.