1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to be additionally paid under paragraph 2 shall be revoked.

1. Facts of recognition;

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

B. A three-lane road in the vicinity of the F point in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E is a structure that combines the two-lanes with the non-protective left line, the two-lanes with the two-lanes with the two-way straight lines, and the two-lanes with the two-lanes to the left right line (hereinafter the above three-lanes are referred to as the “road moving to the instant intersection”; and the above two-lanes are referred to as the “road moving to the instant intersection”; and the above two-lanes are referred to as the “road after the instant intersection”;

Plaintiff

On February 10, 2020, at around 09:40, the vehicle entered the intersection by straighten from the first lane, which is the right line to the left-hand turn of the previous road to the intersection of this case, and passes through the intersection by passing through the intersection while passing through the intersection, while entering the two-lanes of the previous road to the intersection of this case after the intersection of this case, the vehicle passed through the intersection to the three-lanes of the previous road to the intersection of this case, and after the intersection of this case, the part of the left side of the Defendant vehicle, which changed to the one-lane of the road after the intersection of this case, was shocked to the right side of the Plaintiff vehicle (hereinafter “the accident of this case”).

On March 10, 2020, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,553,600 after deducting KRW 388,000 from the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, video, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's right to indemnity

A. In other words, the Defendant’s vehicle entered the intersection by driving the three-lanes prior to the instant intersection, namely, the following circumstances that can be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the above recognized facts of fault ratio and the evidence as seen earlier, and the Defendant’s vehicle runs along the intersection after entering the two-lanes following the instant intersection.