1. The part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

The defendant.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, either in the absence of dispute between the parties, or in the entries or videos of Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 9, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 8 (including branch numbers).

The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with C, which includes self-owned vehicle damage security agreement, with respect to the Drashed vehicle owned by C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the Erash truck (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. At around 15:07 on January 19, 2019, C personnel F, a company, who discovered and suspended the Defendant’s vehicle coming from the right-hand side of the Defendant’s vehicle and the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the front-hand part of the front-hand part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the front-hand part of the front-hand part and the front-hand part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, were connected to the right-hand side by which only one vehicle can pass on the right-hand side at the right-hand side of the vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

On February 14, 2019, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 9,040,000, excluding KRW 500,000,000, out of the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

2. Existence and scope of liability for indemnity; and

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant asserted that the existence of the liability for reimbursement was an accident caused by the former negligence of the other party. However, in full view of the aforementioned facts and the purport of the entire arguments and the evidence revealed earlier, the instant accident was committed by the Defendant’s driver who predicted the situation that the Plaintiff’s driver, who entered the place where the Plaintiff’s right to reimbursement was entered, could bring another vehicle out of the said right to reimbursement on the frontway with a thorough view to the front door, and by appropriately controlling the speed of the vehicle’s driver, who was at the time of the said right to reimbursement.