1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to be paid under the following paragraph (2) shall be revoked.

2.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to Abenz vehicles owned by Mzz comprehensive financial securities company (hereinafter “Mzzs comprehensive financial securities”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to C two-wheeled vehicles owned by B (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

B. On December 16, 2016, D, when driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle into the instant intersection along the two-lane two-lanes adjacent to the Kanyang-dong, Seo-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant intersection”), D changed the traffic signal of the front bank from the straight line (green light) to the yellow light immediately after the traffic signal of the front bank was changed from the straight line to the yellow light, and the straight light signal was changed to the left-hand turn signal while the traffic signal of the front bank was changed to the left-hand turn signal at around the time when the Plaintiff’s vehicle turned to the instant intersection, while entering the instant intersection and passing through the instant intersection along the instant intersection, the front part of the Plaintiff’s front part of the Defendant’s two-lane vehicle, which moved from the opposite direction of the Plaintiff’s moving direction to the instant intersection to the left-hand side of the instant apartment road.

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

On January 25, 2017, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 16,250,000 to F with the repair cost and the cost of parts of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 5, 7, 9, Eul evidence 1, Gap evidence 2 to 4, Gap's video and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. (i) The main point of the party’s assertion is that the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident violates the signal; however, the Defendant’s vehicle was also elected before the traffic signal in the direction is changed to the left turn signal, as well as immediately advanced.