beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to Brensto vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”).
B. On June 30, 2017, the Defendant: (a) driven a 3-lane 100 Orala (hereinafter “Defendant Orala”) on or around 11:45 on June 30, 2017; and (b) passed through the 193-distance intersection (hereinafter “instant intersection”) along the 193-distance intersection along the sand of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, pursuant to the sand of Seodaemun-gu, from the underground intersection to the direction of the 6-lane intersection in the direction of the Heala road; (c) while, as at the time of the instant accident, the proceeding signal marked on the front line signal was stopped; (d) while, as at the time of the instant accident, the Defendant proceeded with the rear part of the front part of the Plaintiff’s license plate, the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle passing along the straight line along the front line signal, etc., along the direction of the Defendant Orala, to the right side of the front part of the Defendant’s road.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). If the present situation at the time of the instant accident shows it as a picture, it is as shown in the attached Form No. 1.
Me1 vehicle is Defendant Lao, and Me. Me. Me. Me. Me. is the Plaintiff vehicle.
On July 7, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 386,300 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and KRW 610,300 for the medical expenses of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driver on July 14, 201 and KRW 224,00 for the instant accident.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including a paper number) and the purport of the whole pleadings [the defendant is not able to believe that the defendant editings Gap evidence No. 4 (as to the plaintiff's motion picture of the plaintiff's motion picture on the left side of the plaintiff's vehicle, by intentionally deleting the screen of the part where the plaintiff can confirm his movement on the left side of the plaintiff's motion from the front side of the plaintiff's vehicle, so that it can be favorable for the plaintiff by intentionally deleting it.