1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following amount.

1. At the time of the occurrence of the basic fact-finding accident, at around 18:14, August 13, 2019, the Plaintiff’s vehicle, at the time of the insured vehicle’s insured vehicle’s insured vehicle’s insured vehicle, had changed the lane from the three lanes of the instant road to the two lanes in the direction of the NHIS (hereinafter “instant road”), and at the time of the end, the Plaintiff vehicle attempted to change the two lanes between the vehicles located on the first lane of the instant road at the time of the occurrence of the instant accident, which conflict with the lower part of the Plaintiff’s left side of the Defendant vehicle in front of the right side of the Defendant vehicle. The amount of the insurance money paid to the Plaintiff’s vehicle repair cost of KRW 957,950, KRW 200,00 for self-paid vehicle damage charges of KRW 20,000 on August 26, 2019 as follows.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 6, 8, Eul evidence 1 and 3 (including Serials)

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s instant accident occurred by the winding side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle while changing the lane rapidly while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was running as a straight line after completing the change of the lane. From the standpoint of the Plaintiff’s driver, it was impossible to anticipate that the Defendant’s vehicle is changing the lane. Therefore, the instant accident occurred by the former negligence of the Defendant’s driver.

B. The Defendant’s instant accident occurred in the process of changing the lane at the same time between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle, and it is possible for the Plaintiff’s driver to have sufficiently predicted that the number of vehicles emitted from changing the lane on the designated lane. As such, in calculating the negligence ratio on the occurrence of the instant accident, the said negligence by the Plaintiff’s driver should be considered in calculating the negligence ratio, and the said ratio shall be 30% to 40% recognized.

3. Determination

(a) Dried stoves;