The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff corresponding to the order to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to C LVF vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”). The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to DV vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

나. 원고 차량이 2017. 2. 23. 08:50경 원주시 E에 있는 F 부근 ‘ㅏ’형 삼거리에서, 편도 3차로 중 2차로를 따라 문막톨게이트 방면에서 문막시장 방면으로 직진 신호에 따라 직진하던 중, 원고 차량 진행방향 오른쪽 도로에서 피고 차량이 원고 차량 주행방향으로 큰 반경으로 우회전하는 바람에 원고 차량이 피고 차량을 미처 피하지 못하고 원고 차량 앞부분으로 피고 차량 오른쪽 측면을 충격하였고, 그로 인하여 원고 차량이 1차로에 있던 쏘나타 차량을 들이받고 멈춰서는 사고가 발생하였다

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

The Plaintiff, based on the instant accident, deemed that the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle exceeds KRW 7,760,000 as indicated in the insurance policy, paid KRW 6,430,000 to the Plaintiff’s owner on March 17, 2017 after treating the Plaintiff’s vehicle by total loss and paying KRW 6,430,00 (automobile value - KRW 7,760,000) to the Plaintiff’s owner of the vehicle.

Plaintiff

Vehicles are vehicles with the 201-type LT A/T model, and the market value of used vehicles at the time of the instant accident is 6,800,000 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements, Gap's 1 through 4, 7 through 14, Eul's 1 through 7 (including branch numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to the previous negligence of the Defendant’s driver of the Defendant vehicle who made a right-hand turn in violation of the signal or violated the traffic method and the duty of safe driving. As such, the Defendant is the insurer of the Defendant vehicle, pursuant to Article 682(1) of the Commercial Act.