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

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 2,626,20 and KRW 1,189,80 among them.

1. Facts of recognition;

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

B. On September 27, 2017, around 18:35, the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “loan”) was waiting to put the left-hand turn signal from F located in the members E of Ansan-si, the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “self-paid vehicle”) waiting to turn to the left-hand turn while moving to the front line of the Plaintiff vehicle (hereinafter “the instant accident”) was caused by an accident that conflicts with the left-hand side of the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle on the right side of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

C. On December 1, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,966,00,000, which deducts the Plaintiff’s share of KRW 500,00 as the repair cost for the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 6 evidence, Eul's 1 through 3 evidence (each number is included; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the accident of this case is deemed to have been caused by the principal negligence of the defendant vehicle who attempted to make a right-hand turn by changing the course of the vehicle by changing the course of the vehicle to the right-hand side while waiting to keep a space on the right-hand side for the vehicle for the right-hand side and put the left-hand turn to the right-hand side.

Therefore, the defendant is liable for the damage suffered by the plaintiff vehicle as the insurer of the defendant vehicle, and the plaintiff is deemed to have subrogated acquired the damage claim of the plaintiff vehicle within the scope of the insurance money paid in accordance with Article 682 of the Commercial Act.

However, there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff's vehicle was under stop in order to circumvent the vehicle at the time of the accident in this case, and it is also the plaintiff's vehicle.