1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Plaintiffs’ Defendants are located in So-jin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City around 11:00 on June 9, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 9, 2017, Defendant C, on board Defendant D and E, driven a vehicle of K Titk’s car (hereinafter “Defendant’s side”) on a 10:49, and proceeded to the lower side of M in front of the road L in Seojin-gu, Seoul at the time of Jeonju, from the right intersection to the right edge, and began to stop to the left right edge at the right edge of the two-lanes of the intersection where signal apparatus is installed.

B. The plaintiff B driving a Nbter vehicle owned by the plaintiff A (hereinafter "the plaintiff's vehicle").

In the middle of the three-lanes of the roads indicated in the port, the two-lanes of the defendant's side, who entered the two-lanes from the border line to the intersection line in accordance with the straight straight line from the intersection line on the side of the border line, led to the collision between the two-lanes and the two-lanes of the lower part on the right side of the defendant's side, which was over the first lane.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

Plaintiff

Until now, the Co., Ltd. entered into an insurance contract with respect to vehicles on the part of the defendant C with the amount of KRW 7,112,00 and KRW 609,070,070, total of the expenses for the repair of the defendant vehicle on the part of the defendant, and KRW 2,034,860, total of the expenses for the hospitalization and the total of the expenses for the funeral care due to light salt in the part of the defendant D, and KRW 14,092,020,020, and the agreed amount of KRW 67,358,540,550,560, including the expenses for the hospitalization and the total of the expenses for the funeral care due to light salt in the part of the defendant E, and the damages in the part of the part of the defendant E, and the amount of the funeral care and the amount of 14,092,020,000,000 each.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 7, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 6 through 10 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion that the accident of this case occurred due to Defendant C's unilateral negligence, and there is no negligence against Plaintiff B, and there is no obligation to pay damages to the defendants due to the accident of this case.

2.