Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff-owned B A-Wnd-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-C-Wed

B. A, around 08:50 on June 26, 2013, while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and getting off to an underground parking lot by breaking the center line on the entry part of the underground parking lot in Ansan-si, the part on the left-hand side of the front-hand part of the Plaintiff’s front-hander of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was going to the ground from the above underground parking lot in the Mapo-gu, Ansan-si.

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

On July 23, 2013, the Plaintiff paid the insurance proceeds of KRW 536,270 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 4, or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that the accident in this case conflicts between the plaintiff's vehicle seeking to enter the ground from the ground to the underground parking lot and the defendant's vehicle seeking to enter the ground from the underground parking lot. The defendant's vehicle driver who could have known that the plaintiff's entry of the vehicle was caused by negligence of the defendant's driver who did not have taken measures such as giving warning to the plaintiff's driver to inform the plaintiff's entry of his entry. On the other hand, the defendant's vehicle marked the center line on the surface in the underground parking lot and the driver's driver was operating the vehicle upwardly on the road in compliance with the central line, and notified the defendant's vehicle's departure at the entrance at the entrance of the road. However, the accident in this case without the defendant's vehicle's exit on the wind side that the plaintiff's vehicle had entered the underground parking lot turning ahead of the central line.