1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the Plaintiff’s failure corresponding to the following additional payment order shall be revoked.

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

At the time of the accident, the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), Defendant Insured Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”), CD temporary October 8, 2017, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the situation of the conflict between the e apartment distance in Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam-gu at the time of the accident, on the first line, and on the second line, the Defendant vehicle was making a left-hand turn on each side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the left-hand side of the Defendant vehicle, and at the time of the accident, there was no dispute over the damage of the secured self-owned vehicle [based on recognition], the Plaintiff’s 1 through 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the ratio of the liability of the "Plaintiff's vehicle: Defendant's vehicle: 40%: 60%," and the defendant asserts that "70%: 30%."

In light of the following circumstances revealed by the above recognition facts and the evidence mentioned above, i.e., ① the Plaintiff’s vehicle started to turn to the left at the first line on the left side of the running direction while driving slowly and making a left turn to the left at the speed of the second line, and there has been a collision with the wind that the front side of the vehicle is cut to the second line because the speed of the front side is increased and the front side of the vehicle is cut to the second line. ② The Defendant’s vehicle starts to turn to the left ahead of the Plaintiff’s vehicle at a speed higher than the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the left side, and it starts to turn to the left at a speed higher than that of the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the left side, and it is reasonable to view that there has been a conflict between the two-way direction and the direction that the Plaintiff’s vehicle came to the second line on the left side and enter the second line on the left side side, it is reasonable to view that the responsibility ratio is equal to 50%.

Therefore, the Defendant’s insurance money for KRW 4,487,00 multiplied by 50% of the liability ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle, and for KRW 2,692,200, which is the amount cited by the first instance court, to the Plaintiff who acquired the right to claim damages against the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant, within the reasonable amount of damages.