1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. Costs arising from an appeal and an incidental appeal shall be respectively.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to the C motor vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who has concluded a mutual aid agreement with respect to Dsi (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On January 6, 2018, around 20:42, the Plaintiff’s vehicle conflict with the Defendant’s vehicle, which was directly left from the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the left side while leaving the intersection where there is no signal, etc. to the neighboring E area in the Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon.

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

On January 18, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 8,330,000 in total with the repair cost, etc. of Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's vehicle first enters the above intersection and has priority to pass the road, but the defendant's vehicle passes the reverse direction in violation of the speed limit and disregards the previous temporary stop line in front of the crosswalk and the accident of this case occurred at the above intersection, so the driver's fault ratio of the defendant's vehicle is more than 70%.

B. The defendant asserts that the defendant's assertion that although the defendant's vehicle first entered the above intersection and has the priority to pass, the accident of this case occurred as the plaintiff's vehicle's wind to pass as it violated its concession driving duty, the driver's fault ratio of the plaintiff vehicle is at least 70%.

3. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the above facts and the evidence revealed earlier, namely, ① the Defendant’s vehicle appears to have entered the said intersection at the same time, and ② the width of the road on which the Defendant’s vehicle passed due to unauthorized parking on the road without any signal, is the width of the road along which the Plaintiff’s vehicle passed.