1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is KRW 728,400 and also the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to have been filed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with B and C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is a driver who drives a D vehicle at the time of the occurrence of the following insurance accident (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”):

B. On February 26, 2016, around 11:40, an insurance accident occurred that conflicts between the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle that was going to the front side of the Busan Northern-gu, and the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle that was going to the front side of the white middle school from the front side of the white middle school, and the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle that was going to the left side from the right side of the running direction of the said Defendant’s vehicle and the front part of the Plaintiff’

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

In relation to the instant accident, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,821,00 as the repair cost for the Plaintiff’s vehicle by March 24, 2016.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry and video of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 8 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the rate of negligence in relation to the instant accident

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred by the defendant's negligence while driving the accident in violation of the duty of care required for entering the intersection, and that the defendant's negligence ratio reaches 50%. 2) The defendant asserts that the accident in this case occurred by the plaintiff driver's negligence while temporarily stopping the vehicle before entering the intersection from the small road to the intersection without examining the right and the right.

B. In light of the purport of the entire argument as seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s driver, who was proceeding on a road with a relatively narrow width at the time of the instant accident, ought to yield the course to the Defendant’s vehicle driving on a road with a wider width than that of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, is temporarily suspended before entering the said intersection so that the vehicle’s attitude on the other direction can be considered.