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. Basic facts

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On April 22, 2016, around 09:43, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding along the one lane, which is the internship between the five lanes near Yeongdeungpo-gu Office, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul.

The two lanes of the foregoing road are divided into two lanes, and the lane was installed to prohibit the change of the vehicle. However, the Defendant’s vehicle attempted to enter the two lanes beyond the prohibition of the change of the vehicle’s vehicle and attempted to enter the two lanes, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s right side of the vehicle, which is proceeding as its front section (hereinafter “instant accident”), thereby causing injury to Plaintiff’s driver C and passenger D.

C. By May 18, 2016, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,302,230 in total with medical expenses and agreed amount incurred from the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged as above, namely, ① the instant accident occurred due to the failure of the Defendant’s vehicle to drive the vehicle, and the road that is prohibited from the change of the vehicle, and attempted to change the vehicle. ② The driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle cannot predict that the vehicle is attempting to change the vehicle as above. ③ The Defendant’s vehicle is asserting that the Defendant’s vehicle, as the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered at least 1/3 of the first lane, reported the Defendant’s vehicle in the state where the vehicle was stopped and stopped, and that the accident was caused by shocking the vehicle without accelerating and avoiding the speed, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the accident. However, the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s front part of the Defendant’s vehicle is proceeding without examining the Plaintiff’s vehicle, in light of the fact that there was a shock on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

The accident of this case seems to have occurred.