1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

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

B. On November 29, 2014, the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle driven the Defendant’s vehicle at around 15:48 on November 29, 201, and turned to the left at the right edge of the Plaintiff’s vehicle which stopped after making a turn to the left at the right edge of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, while driving the Defendant’s vehicle at around 15:48, and driving the two-lanes of the 32-lanes of the Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul.

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

On December 26, 2014, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 306,105 on the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2 and 3, or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant accident was caused by the total negligence of Defendant vehicle, as the Defendant’s vehicle stopped on the front section, and accordingly, the Defendant attempted to change the course into two lanes.

Since the defendant's vehicle was shocked, the accident of this case is caused by the total negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle.

B. In full view of the above evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiff vehicle at the time of the accident in this case had stopped over the first and second lanes, but it does not seem to have attempted to change the vehicle in the second way, and the defendant vehicle driver also has a big turn to the left after recognizing the plaintiff vehicle, but it appears that the front side of the defendant vehicle might shock the plaintiff vehicle on the left side after the front side of the vehicle. In full view of the above circumstances, the accident in this case is the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff vehicle who stopped over the first and second lanes immediately after the left side, and the plaintiff vehicle.