1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the owner of B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On May 15, 2015, at around 08:30, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is proceeding along the two lanes near the New Transboundary Tridong, Dongjak-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government, along the two-lanes of the three-lane road, at the above three-lanes of the road, and the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle entering the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle changed the two-lanes into the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

On July 1, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 700,000 as the repair cost for the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence A 1 through 5, Evidence B 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the accident of this case occurred while the defendant vehicle changed the lane for the purpose of overtaking the plaintiff vehicle in an intersection where the change of course is prohibited, the defendant asserts that the defendant is liable to pay the above insurance money of KRW 700,000 paid by the plaintiff with respect to the accident of this case caused by the total negligence of the defendant vehicle, and damages for delay.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case was caused by the unilateral negligence of the plaintiff vehicle, because the plaintiff vehicle did not yield the way to the defendant vehicle who completed the change of the lane in the front section and was pushed ahead with the front section of the defendant vehicle.

B. In light of the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff, who was driven by the Defendant at the three-lanes, is driving along the above intersection and attempted to change the two-lanes into the two-lanes, and was driving at the two-lanes later at the time of completing the entry into the two-lanes.