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. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A car (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to B bus (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. Around 10:36 May 4, 2016, the Plaintiff’s vehicle stopped on the left side in order to avoid a collision with the said vehicle, while driving along the two lanes in the latter part of the two-lanes of the Seodaemun-gu Seoul Western-ro 520 U.S. in the latter part of the two-lanes in the two-lanes: (a) in order to avoid a collision with the said vehicle, the vehicle stopped on the left side; (b) the Defendant’s vehicle runs along the two-lanes of the Defendant’s vehicle with the two-lanes from the first lane; and (c) the Defendant’s vehicle runs along the two-lanes in the front part of the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the part of the part

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On July 7, 2016, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,206,110 under the name of the repair cost for the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of Recognition] A without dispute, part of Gap evidence 1, entry or video of Gap evidence 2 through 4 (including provisional number), video of Eul evidence 1, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence as above, i.e., ① the Plaintiff’s vehicle, while proceeding on the two-lanes, was parked on the left side in order to avoid a collision with the Defendant’s vehicle, and ② the Defendant’s vehicle, while proceeding along the two-lanes, is proceeding without discovering the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked on the said ground, without taking measures such as speeding the vehicle and speeding the Plaintiff’s vehicle. In full view of the following circumstances, the instant accident was caused by the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the two-lanes, and the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked along the Defendant’s vehicle, which neglected the duty to stop at the front.