1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, KRW 1,521,480 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto from August 15, 2017 to May 21, 2019 against the Plaintiff.

1. Cases of indemnity regarding traffic accidents;

A. On July 29, 2017, at the time of the accident, the insured vehicle, such as the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s insured vehicle”), entered the intersection in the direction of right from the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the intersection in the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle. The Defendant’s vehicle entered the intersection in the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle. The left-hand side part of the Defendant’s front driver’s vehicle and the left-hand part of the Defendant’s vehicle followed the left-hand side of the vehicle.

The intersection is a place where traffic is not controlled.

Plaintiff

Vehicles run without stopping or walking at the time of entry into the intersection, and discovered the defendant vehicle and shocked without operating the brate.

The defendant's vehicle entered the intersection after temporary suspension before entering the intersection.

Details of the payment of insurance proceeds to Plaintiffs 5,071,600 won on August 14, 2017

(b) The driver of any motor vehicle who intends to drive a motor vehicle into the intersection where traffic is not controlled to determine negligence shall yield the right of way to other motor vehicles, when other motor vehicles are already traveling through the intersection;

The driver of any motor vehicle who intends to make a left-hand turn at the intersection shall yield the right of way to other motor vehicles, if any.

(See Article 26 of the Road Traffic Act). The instant accident occurred due to the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that did not yield the right of left-hand turn to the Defendant’s vehicle entering the intersection where the right of left-hand turn is located after temporary suspension

However, as the defendant is not in a situation where it is impossible to find the plaintiff's vehicle, there is negligence on the defendant who fails to yield the course to the plaintiff's vehicle.

It is reasonable to view the negligence ratio between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle as 70:30 in light of the background of the instant accident, the shock level, speed, etc. of the vehicle.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 to 5, and Eul.