1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. On May 21, 2019, at the time of the occurrence of the basic fact-finding accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding along the three-lanes of the instant road in the situation of collision with the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle CD at the time of May 16:24, 2019 at the time of the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle (Plaintiff’s vehicle) (hereinafter “instant road”). However, the Defendant’s vehicle was changing from the two-lane to the three-lanes of the instant road, resulting in a sudden change of the vehicle to the three-lanes of the Plaintiff’s seat on the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant primary accident”). After all, when a passenger of the Plaintiff’s vehicle opens a front door to handle the accident, the front and rear part of the damaged vehicle (FF vehicle) driven on the fourth lane of the road in this case was shocked.

(hereinafter “instant secondary accident”). The amount of the Plaintiff’s insurance proceeds is KRW 2,493,840 (including the amount of the instant primary accident and the instant secondary accident) that the Plaintiff paid with respect to the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant secondary accident”). The details of the instant accident on June 11, 2019 are as follows.

[Based on recognition] Each entry and video of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 10 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding at a normal speed along the three-lanes of the instant road. However, the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the two-lanes of the instant road led to the instant primary accident by changing its course to the three-lanes of the instant road. The instant primary accident occurred due to the total fault of the Defendant’s vehicle.

After the accident, the plaintiff's vehicle immediately stopped, and the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle opened the front door for the measure of the accident, and the second accident of this case, which conflict with the damaged vehicle driven on the fourth lane of the road of this case, occurred.

Therefore, the defendant, who is the driver of the defendant vehicle, is the damage caused by the first accident in this case and the second accident in this case.