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.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On December 25, 2016, around 19:45, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving along the two-lanes in the four-lanes adjacent to the Geumdong-gu Geumdong-dong Yanndong-ro, Sungnam-si (hereinafter “preferred vehicle”) was found to be late due to the sudden stop of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the front part of the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was shocked by the front part of the front part of the vehicle (hereinafter “the first accident”), and immediately after the first accident, the Defendant’s vehicle following the Plaintiff’s vehicle shocked the rear part of the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “the second accident”).

On January 4, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 6,600,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

On the other hand, on January 16, 2017, the Defendant paid KRW 1,248,000 at the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3 through 7, and 8-1 through 5 of evidence 8 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s primary accident is that the Plaintiff’s front vehicle shocks the front vehicle, and the damage caused by the accident is limited to the front part of the Plaintiff’s front part.

Since the second accident was entirely caused by the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the insurance money of KRW 4,740,000 (the amount equivalent to the repair cost for the remainder of the damage except for the above part) and damages for delay.

(2) Defendant 1’s primary accident was due to negligence on the part of Plaintiff 1, the time of the accident is night, and the Plaintiff 1’s primary accident showed that the previous vehicle was stopped at approximately three seconds prior to the occurrence of the primary accident, but it was proceeding without speed.