Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with the automobile E (hereinafter “Defendant”) with respect to the automobile D (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with the automobile E (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On June 4, 2019, around 10:50, G underground parking lots located in Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon: (a) an accident occurred between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle, who was getting off the connecting passage in the direction of the entrance of the ground and the underground parking lot located in the direction of the main entrance of the ground (hereinafter “accident”).

(c)

On June 12, 2019, the Plaintiff paid the remainder of KRW 1,241,00 as insurance money, excluding KRW 200,000,000, out of the total repair cost of Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's statements or images, Gap's statements, Gap's evidence, Gap's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's evidence, Eul's whole purport of pleading

2. The evidence as seen earlier, in full view of all the circumstances such as the background of the above accident, degree of shock and shock, and the situation of the connecting passage at the time of the accident, the driver's fault ratio of the plaintiff's vehicle and the defendant's vehicle in the above accident is 40%:60% (the plaintiff's vehicle's side as the vehicle was on the passage of a photograph connecting the slope, and was negligent in neglecting the duty of front direction, stopping, or slowly driving, but the negligence on the part of the defendant's vehicle which clearly affected the central line is somewhat larger than the negligence on the part of the defendant's vehicle that clearly pusheded the central line.

(B) Therefore, the Defendant’s claim amounting to the Plaintiff = 664,600 won = [1,441,00 won for repair (200,000 won for self-payment of KRW 1,241,00 for self-payment of KRW 200] x 60% for self-payment of KRW 200,00 for the part cited in the first instance trial] and 376,400 for the part cited in the first instance trial following the payment of the insurance money, it is reasonable to dispute the existence or scope of the Defendant’s obligation to perform from June 13, 2019 to the extent of its existence or scope.

Until November 26, 2019, which is the date of adjudication of the first instance court recognized, 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Code.