1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to be paid under the following paragraph (2) shall be revoked.

2.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties or may be acknowledged in full view of the following facts: Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, evidence Nos. 8-1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, evidence Nos. 4 and 6, evidence Nos. 8-3, and evidence No. 8-3.

The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to a motor vehicle A (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the BA vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On July 22, 2016, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driven the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in front of the front week without indicating the median line near CD located in the front city. On the other hand, the Defendant’s vehicle driving at the center of the road is deemed to proceed to the center of the road, and the Defendant’s vehicle stopped at the right edge of the road driving direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle. However, the Defendant’s vehicle parked the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle beyond the center part of the road and the

hereinafter referred to as "the accident of this case"

C. On October 5, 2016 due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,218,000 as the part price of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to E Company, and KRW 5,136,000 in total by paying KRW 1,918,00 as the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to 1,918,000 on October 12, 2016.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the party’s assertion (i) The driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is due to the total negligence of the Defendant driver, as the instant accident was attributable to the front negligence of the Defendant vehicle, even though the Defendant vehicle was faced with the right edge of the direction of the vehicle’s driving, and the Defendant vehicle was faced with the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which is overworking along the virtual center line, even though it was avoided by the right edge of the direction of the vehicle’s driving.

For the insured of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff covered KRW 5,136,00 by the repair cost, etc. of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.