1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile accident insurance contract with respect to A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has concluded a comprehensive automobile accident insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. Around 00:10 on March 19, 2015, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding along the three-lanes of the four-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes as the Olympic Games from the scambon. However, the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the two-lanes of the two-lanes from the scambon as the scambon in the front line where the change of the two-lanes of the vehicle was prohibited, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle following the Defendant’s vehicle did not avoid this, and the part of the back part of the Defendant vehicle was shocked with the front part of the front part of the Plaintiff vehicle.

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

On May 18, 2015, in relation to the instant accident, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,294,00 as insurance money under the name of the repair cost for the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 through 10, video, purport of whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred due to the error of the defendant's vehicle that was immediately stopped after the alteration of the lane in the real line where the change of lanes is prohibited, and that the defendant should pay the plaintiff the total amount of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff and the damages for delay thereof with the indemnity amount. 2) The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's vehicle that was subsequently driven did not secure the safety distance with the defendant's vehicle, so the accident in this case occurred, and thus the plaintiff's claim for indemnity cannot be complied with.

B. We examine the judgment, and the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire arguments, namely, the defendant vehicle’s direction to its right.