The part against the plaintiff falling under the amount ordered to be paid under the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

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

B. On May 20, 2019, around 19:42, the Plaintiff: (a) sent the Sungnam-dong intersection of Sungnam-dong, Daejeon, Daejeon, to a three-lane radius from Samsung Ne-dong to the Gayang Ne-dong surface, in line with the straight line, while waiting at the three-lane radius from Samsung Ne-dong; (b) while the Defendant’s vehicle waiting at the two-lane in the same direction is proceeding in accordance with the same straight line, the two-lanes conflict with the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the left part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

As a result of the instant accident, E, F, G, and H, who is the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle, suffered each injury, and accordingly, the Defendant first paid KRW 2,629,300 to H, F, G, and E in terms of each medical fee and agreement.

After the instant accident, the committee for deliberation on indemnity dispute resolution held at the Defendant’s request (hereinafter “Deliberation Committee”) determined the ratio of the responsibility of the instant accident to Defendant 0 on the ground that “The Defendant’s vehicle was in direct interest in the top of the intersection, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle conflict with the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle”

(hereinafter “instant decision”). E.

On October 15, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,471,630 (=2,629,300 won 1,614,110 x 3) to the Defendant on October 15, 2019.

(hereinafter referred to as “the amount of indemnity of this case”). [Grounds for recognition] Gap’s 1 through 10, Eul’s 1 and 2, or the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. We examine the determination on the ratio of negligence, i.e., the following circumstances revealed by adding the aforementioned facts to the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., Samsung Ne-distance where the instant accident occurred.