1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Facts of recognition

With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

Plaintiff

On December 12, 2016, around 21:30 on December 12, 2016, when the vehicle is proceeding two lanes at the intersection near the Cheongdong Samsung-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and is proceeding two lanes, it conflicts with the defendant's vehicle that was proceeding bypassing from the right side of the plaintiff's vehicle running in the direction of the running of the plaintiff's vehicle to the direction

(hereinafter “instant accident”). On January 6, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5,550,000 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as insurance proceeds.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry and video of Gap's evidence 1 to 6, assertion and judgment of the purport of whole pleading

A. The plaintiff asserted that the accident of this case occurred due to the failure of the defendant's vehicle to make a right-hand turn to a large radius without the right-hand side while the plaintiff's vehicle was normally under the new subparagraph. Thus, the accident of this case was caused by the whole negligence of the defendant vehicle.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserted that the instant accident occurred due to negligence, even if the Plaintiff’s vehicle had entered the intersection by a yellow change, in violation of the signal, and the Defendant had already discovered the Defendant’s vehicle in the process of bypassing, and did not take safety measures.

B. According to the above evidence, immediately after the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the intersection at the time of the instant accident, the signal on the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was changed to yellow color. The said intersection was a large intersection between the eight-lane and the six-lane from each other, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle was attempting to make a right-way at the front side while passing through the intersection. The Defendant’s vehicle attempted to enter the right-way at the front side without making a right-way, depending on the three-lanes of the three-lane road.