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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with Nonparty A regarding Nonparty A and B-learning vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”). The Defendant is the construction and manager of the national highways No. 22 (hereinafter “instant road”).

B. At around 01:30 on September 15, 2012, A, while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the same Do-ri metropolitan area as the previous Do-dong, the instant road led to an accident (hereinafter “instant accident”) that led to the impact on the right side of the front Do-dong railing, left the lane as the driver’s attention, leading to the shooting distance in the front Do-dong, e.g., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the

C. On the other hand, the road of this case was bended by the direction, and the road of this case was a two-lane road in the vicinity of the accident site, and it was connected to the front left side and the right side of the road of this village, and the road of this case was entered into a two-lane village. On the other hand, the crosswalk was installed immediately before that distance, and the road was temporarily expanded to four-lane prior to the crosswalk for the left left and the right side, and the road was expanded to four-lane prior to the crosswalk. After the passage of the crosswalk, the road of this case was led to the upper side of the bridge of the two-lane road. The road of this case was installed at the center of the right side road and the main road, and the point of accident is the intersection of the right side of the bridge.

On October 2, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 for A’s medical expenses to the Jeonnam University Hospital, and KRW 7,620,000 for damage compensation to A until November 19, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 16, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, 6, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that the road in this case is a place where vehicles are rapidly driven at a speed of 80km/h, and the lane has decreased rapidly from the fourth lane to the second lane due to the front and rear of the crosswalks. However, the defendant is inevitable to change the lane, although it is inevitable to change the lane.