1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff, which orders additional payment, shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The circumstances surrounding the instant accident are as follows.

사고 당시 보험관계 원고 조합원 차량 피고 피보험차량 C D(이륜차량) 일시 2017. 12. 13. 17:00 장소 서울시 성동구 E에 있는 F교회 앞 삼거리 교차로 충돌상황 원고 차량은 위 장소 ‘ㅓ’ 자형 교차로 편도 3차로 중 1차로에서 신호에 따라 유턴을 하고 있었음. 피고 오토바이는 위 교차로에서 원고 차량이 유턴하여 진입하려던 대로에 연결된 소로로부터 크게 우회전을 하여 바로 대로의 1차로에 진입한 후 바로 2차로로 차선변경을 하여 진행하고자 하다가, 유턴을 하던 원고 차량과 충돌. 수리비지급액 346,000원

B. The judgment of the court of first instance judged the negligence ratio between the plaintiff's vehicle and the defendant's Oral Ba as 60:40, and calculated the plaintiff's amount of indemnity as 138,400 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 4, Eul 1, 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The accident of this case occurred due to the plaintiff's fault that caused the plaintiff's fault by neglecting his duty of care in the front direction with a view to driving ahead of the previous vehicle which the defendant Orala, who entered a one-lane of the right of way, had been stopped in the front direction, and changing the course into a two-lane. The driver of the plaintiff's vehicle, who was the driver of the driver's vehicle, could not expect that another Orala, which was behind the parked convenience vehicle, could not change his own course. Therefore, the responsibility of the accident of this case is entirely attributable to the defendant. (2) The defendant's responsibility of the accident of this case is entirely responsible for entering the road where the accident occurred by the defendant Orala, entering the right of way, was stopped over two and three-lanes at the entrance of the entry place at which the defendant Orala had no choice but to proceed immediately through the right of way in the front direction.