1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The following are the developments leading up to the instant accident (hereinafter “instant accident”).

At the time of the accident, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff related to the insurance (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) around September 2, 2017, around 09:46, around September 2, 2017, when the insured vehicle of the Defendant insured (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) was parked on the Defendant vehicle driving side of the Defendant vehicle of the two-lane road in the vicinity of the shooting distance collision situation near the front city of the city of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City. While the vehicle of the Plaintiff is driving along with the Defendant vehicle on the right side of the vehicle, the vehicle of the Plaintiff is driving across the center line and the part left side of the vehicle of the Plaintiff vehicle while driving with the Defendant vehicle while the vehicle is driving along with the vehicle of the vehicle of the Plaintiff, the payment of the collision insurance proceeds amounting to KRW 200,000,000, the self-paid share of the

B. On November 9, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,00,000,000, after deducting KRW 200,000 of the self-paid cost, for damages, such as the repair cost, etc. of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 6 (including each number), Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant accident was entirely caused by the negligence of the Defendant’s driver, and that the Defendant sought reimbursement of KRW 2,000,000 paid as the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, etc. against the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant asserted that the instant accident was caused by the gross concurrence of the Plaintiff’s negligence by the Plaintiff’s driver, and that the Plaintiff’s negligence by the Plaintiff’s driver was 70% in light of all the circumstances, including the circumstances of the accident.

B. (1) Determination is based on the following circumstances: (i) the Plaintiff’s driver left the place of the instant accident by making a left-hand turn and entered the place of the instant accident; and (ii) the Defendant’s driver was parked in the direction of the passage.