1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff equivalent to the amount ordered to be additionally paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

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

B. Around 11:50 on January 7, 2019, the Defendant’s vehicle was going to turn to the left and to the left from the front side of the Seo-gu Incheon apartment apartment unit, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, and the part of the driver’s seat of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which turned to the port from the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle toward the left side.

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

On January 18, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5,970,00,00 as insurance money after deducting KRW 500,000 of the self-paid cost for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3 and 4, video, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the following circumstances, the instant accident was caused by the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver’s negligence, comprehensively taking account of the facts based on the negligence ratio and the evidence revealed earlier.

The negligence ratio between the plaintiff driver and the defendant driver shall be 30:70.

1) The driver of a vehicle who intends to make a left turn at an intersection where traffic is not controlled shall yield the right of way to the other vehicle when there are other vehicles seeking to proceed straight through or make a right-hand turn (Article 25(4) of the Road Traffic Act). The Plaintiff’s vehicle is going to go straight through a three-distance intersection where traffic is not controlled and the Defendant’s vehicle has made a left-hand turn at the same intersection, and thus, the Plaintiff’s vehicle has the right of priority. (2) The Defendant’s vehicle was in a situation where another vehicle is going to go through the intersection after a temporary stop at the intersection, and thus, it is well examined whether there is another vehicle going through