1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 2,19,411 and shall pay to the plaintiff January 18, 2018.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s vehicle C at around 18:50 on January 18, 2018 (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”).

) A F vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”) running along the intersection in front of the E convenience point in the Gu/U.S. D. However, at the time, the Plaintiff’s vehicle traveling along the said intersection from the right side of the vehicle in the direction of the city.

) The part of the front part of the Defendant vehicle shocked the right side of the Plaintiff vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

(2) The Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract regarding the Defendant’s vehicle. The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the facts of the occurrence of liability and the recognition of the above limitation, the defendant is liable to compensate the damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident in this case as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.

On the other hand, in full view of the following circumstances revealed by the above-mentioned facts and the evidence revealed, it is reasonable to limit the Defendant’s liability to 50% as the instant accident occurred by the negligence of the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s driver.

① In light of the fact that the access distance between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle appears to exceed the access distance between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the instant intersection.

그러나 실황조사서의 기재, 사고부위 등에 비추어 보면 사고 발생 당시 원고 차량의 속도가 더 빨랐던 것으로 보이고, 차량의 진행 속도에 따라 진입거리가 달라질 수 있으므로, 원고 차량이 유의미한 차이로 선진입하였다고 단정하기 어렵다.

② The width of the road along which the Plaintiff’s vehicle passes and the road along which the Defendant’s vehicle passes.