1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 48,000 on March 10, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On January 16, 2017, at around 20:25, the Defendant’s vehicle entered the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was a four-lane of the Plaintiff’s four-lane as above, and the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle, when entering the road of the Dondo-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Indonesnesian Embassy T-type T-type T-lane, bypassing to the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as "the accident of this case". (c)

On March 9, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 60,000 as insurance money at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, images (including paper numbers) of Gap evidence 3 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case is due to the shock accident behind the plaintiff's vehicle that the defendant, who was bypassing from the course, was responsible for the transfer of the defendant's vehicle to the defendant's vehicle, due to the shock accident. Accordingly, the defendant is driving four-lanes of the plaintiff's vehicle.

The defendant vehicle was discovered and changed to the third lane on the left-hand side, and the accident of this case occurred while changing to the fourth lane, so that the plaintiff vehicle was grossly negligent.

B. According to the above findings of the determination, the instant accident was committed by the Defendant’s vehicle running along theway and attempted to enter the same as the Plaintiff’s vehicle was travelling. In light of the collision part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle immediately after the accident, it is difficult to view the Defendant’s vehicle to have entered the vehicle more than the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and thus, it is recognized as the principal negligence on the part of the Defendant’s driver.

The defendant found the defendant's vehicle and changed the lane into a three-lane.