1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”). The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to D Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On January 5, 2018, around 8:24, 2018, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was straight along the two-lanes near the 3-lanes of the Jochip IIC Department in Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, the Defendant’s vehicle, who was straight along the three-lanes in the same direction as the Plaintiff’s vehicle, opened a direction direction, etc., and stopped after changing the two-lanes, the vehicle did not avoid this, and there was an accident that conflicts between the front of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the rear side of the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On January 30, 2018, the Plaintiff paid the remainder of KRW 3,660,000 after deducting KRW 500,000 of the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle from KRW 4,160,000.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 7 (including each number), Eul's 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (i) while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was normally straight along the two-lanes of the three-lanes, the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the three-lanes rapidly attempted to change the two-lanes, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle stopped at the same time, resulting in shock that the vehicle was unable to avoid the Defendant’s vehicle. Therefore, the instant accident occurred due to the Defendant’s main fault (70%).

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 2,562,00 (=3,660,000 x 70%) equivalent to the fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle out of KRW 3,660,000 of the insurance money paid by the Plaintiff as the indemnity amount, and the delay damages therefrom.

B. The instant accident, even though the Defendant’s vehicle stopped due to the stopping of the previous vehicle after the alteration of the vehicle from the three lanes to the two lanes, the Plaintiff’s vehicle neglected to comply with the duty of the front stop and the duty of the safety distance, thereby leaving the front side of the Defendant vehicle.