1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff Company A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and with respect to the Defendant Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

B. On April 30, 2015, around 21:30, the Plaintiff’s vehicle runs along the two-lanes (sections) as shown in the attached photo near Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City C intersection, and the Defendant’s vehicle runs along the two-lanes (sections) among the two-lanes (sections). On the other hand, on the two-lanes, the vehicles used at a slow speed, where the vehicles to move to the right side.

C. While the Defendant’s vehicle driving along a two-lane as above, there was an accident that the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving along a one-lane at a relatively rapid speed, which led to a contact between the Plaintiff’s right side side side side and the left side side of the Defendant’s vehicle with the right side side in order to enter the right intersection.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). D.

On October 29, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 198,910 to the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as repair cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 5, Eul 1 through 5 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the accident of this case entirely occurred due to the negligence of the defendant's vehicle, the defendant is obligated to pay the above repair cost of KRW 198,910 and damages for delay.

Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the claim of this case should be dismissed since the accident of this case occurred entirely due to the negligence of the plaintiff vehicle.

B. In full view of the road situation, accident circumstance, etc. at the point of the instant accident recognized earlier, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is the first lane, the straight line, and the Defendant’s vehicle was driven respectively on the two-lane, the straight line and the right-hand line, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driven on the two-lane, the straight line and the right-hand line.