1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 520,300 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto are from April 10, 2018 to September 25, 2019.

1. The circumstances leading up to the instant accident are as follows.

On January 5, 2018, 19:13, Jan. 5, 2018 at the time of the accident, the insured vehicle CD of the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, was stopped with the front wheels more than two lanes in order for the Plaintiff to change course to the two lanes. The vehicle of the Plaintiff, who operated the three lanes near the new town Station in Gangnam-gu Seoul to move into the two lanes, began to move into the three lanes. The vehicle of the Defendant, who entered the four lanes to the three lanes, after the driver's seat of the vehicle of the Plaintiff and the front part of the Plaintiff vehicle of the vehicle, entered the vehicle into the front part of the vehicle, and the 832,000,000 won of the collision insurance money and the front part of the vehicle of the Plaintiff, 207,00 won of the insured vehicle of the self-paid vehicle of the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff 20,000 won, without any dispute, and the purport of Gap's subparagraphs 1 through 3 and 5 (hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. In light of all the circumstances, such as the circumstance of the accident that can be recognized by the above evidence, the situation of the collision, the part of the collision, the direction, etc. on the left side of at least 30 seconds of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which is the Defendant’s vehicle proceeding on the rear side, and it was difficult for the Plaintiff’s vehicle to easily expect that the vehicle should proceed again on three-lanes, while most of the Plaintiff’s vehicle remains at the three-lane, and the Defendant’s vehicle entered the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle somewhat rapidly, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident was caused by the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver, and that the negligence ratio is 3:7.

Therefore, the Defendant’s indemnity amounting to KRW 520,300 (=total damage amounting to KRW 1,039,000 】 70% - self-payment amounting to KRW 207,000, and Supreme Court Decision 2015Da236431 Decided January 28, 2016) and accordingly, the Defendant’s remedy for the existence or scope of the Defendant’s performance obligation from April 10, 2018 to September 25, 2019, the date of a ruling of the competent court, which is appropriate to dispute on the existence or scope of the Defendant’s performance obligation, shall be 5% per annum under the Civil Act and the litigation promotion from the following day to the date of full payment.