1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 550,960 against the Plaintiff and its related amount from January 27, 2018 to August 16, 2019 against the Defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”). The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to D Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On December 4, 2017, around 15:25, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was waiting in order to make a right-hand way to enter from the back road (on a short line) in Gangnam-gu Seoul E-gu to the fourth-lane, and there was an accident that conflict between the right-hand side of the Defendant’s vehicle and the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle while the Defendant’s vehicle, which was on the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was making a right-hand way. (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On January 26, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,377,400 as the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5 evidence, Eul's 1 through 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that, in order for the defendant vehicle to enter the zone, the plaintiff is responsible for the negligence on the part of the defendant vehicle, since the plaintiff's vehicle stopped to make a right-hand route from the defendant vehicle to the right-hand side without properly examining the plaintiff vehicle that was stopped to make a right-hand route, and the accident of this case occurred by shocking the plaintiff vehicle.

Accordingly, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven behind the Defendant’s vehicle was more than 70% of the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, while waiting in order to make a bypass, and that the accident of this case occurred by entering the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was going behind the Defendant’s vehicle, into the right edge of the Defendant vehicle to overtake the Defendant vehicle, and thus, the accident of this case occurred.

B. According to the evidence revealed earlier, the driver of the Defendant vehicle checks the presence of another vehicle at the direction of the front line and prevents contact with the vehicle.