1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

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

B. On February 10, 2019, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was in a direct direction at the intersection near the Hospital in Gangseo-si, Chungcheongnam-si on February 15:13, 2019, there was an accident of collision with the Defendant’s vehicle that enters the left at the right side of the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On February 21, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,319,150 to the owner F of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, excluding KRW 200,000,000.

[Ground of Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 13 evidence, Eul 1 through 7 evidence (including each number in the case of a tentative number), the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred is without finding the Plaintiff’s vehicle and without entering the intersection while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was waiting to turn to the left at the right side of the Plaintiff’s right side.

Plaintiff

It is the shock of the vehicle, which is caused by the negligence of the defendant vehicle.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which neglected the duty of fronting at the three-lanes prior to the right-hand on which the right-hand surface instruction is marked.

C. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged in addition to the results of the fact-finding on the Chief of Gangnam Police Station of this Court’s fact-finding and the entire purport of the pleadings, are acknowledged as follows. ① The instant accident occurred while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was under direct control pursuant to the new subparagraph, the Defendant’s vehicle entered the road on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and ② the Plaintiff’s vehicle is indicated with an instruction of prohibition surface.