1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the Defendant: (a) KRW 20,028,00 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from May 27, 2015 to July 12, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

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

B. On July 27, 2014, at around 20:50, the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”) was a traffic accident in which the part of the Defendant’s left side of the vehicle and the part of the back side of the Plaintiff’s left side of the vehicle are collisioned (hereinafter “instant accident”) that took place in the direction of a bus platform near the Yancheon-si, Yancheon-si, Yancheon-si, and the direction of the bus platform adjacent to the Yancheon-do, Seocheon-do, and that was going toward the direction of the bus platform

C. The above intersection is not a traffic control but a road where traffic is controlled by yellow on-and-off signals, and the road driven by the Plaintiff’s vehicle is a road without a central line, and the road driven by the Defendant’s vehicle is a secondary lane from which the central line is located.

The current status of roads, the driving direction of the center and the defendant vehicle, and the location of the accident in this case are as follows:

By May 26, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 66,760,000 insurance money under the name of the repair cost for the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries or videos of Gap's evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence and the purport of the argument as seen earlier, the following facts are as follows: ① the running roads of the Plaintiff vehicle are without a central line, and the passage roads of the Defendant vehicle are access roads to the main roads, and there are no lanes, whereas the main driving roads of the Defendant vehicle are the main roads with a main passage of the lane. ② The Defendant vehicle driver stated at the time of the traffic accident investigation that “the vehicle driver was faced with the instant vehicle, which is deemed to be a vehicle with a large amount of noise in the front river park,” and the Plaintiff vehicle stops the final stop by making the vehicle a large amount of 180 degrees, ③ in the form of the instant accident intersection, and the Plaintiff vehicle’s driving roads as its main driving roads.