1. 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. The fact of recognition is an insurer who has concluded a motor vehicle insurance contract with B as the insured, and the defendant is the owner of the vehicle C (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”), and the intervenor joining the defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has concluded a mutual aid contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

D, on August 19, 2015, driving a vehicle E (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) as an employee of A on-line driving on August 19, 2015, and driving a two-lane (on-sections) between the two-lanes in Yongsan-gu Seoul Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, the two-lanes in the vicinity of the luxa Station and tried to turn to the left from the luxa Station. However, it conflicts with the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the wind that the Defendant, prior to one-lane, has entered the right side of the safety zone, but has changed the direction to the left side.

On December 17, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 13,900,000 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident as a security for self-motor vehicle damage.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1, or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence and the purport of the oral argument as seen earlier, namely, (i) the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle should have been able to predict the direction of the vehicle of the following vehicle by operating the vehicle in compliance with the lane; (ii) the instant accident occurred due to the mistake that the vehicle passed through the U-turn section and entered the U-turn section as the right-hand safety area, and attempted to make the U-turn at the center line; and (ii) the U-turn and left-hand turn are all allowed for the vehicle of the Plaintiff’s driving vehicle; and in such a case, the previous Defendant’s vehicle operates the vehicle while operating the vehicle in accordance with the direction-setting, etc., the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle could make the left-hand or U-turn, maintain the safety distance with the Defendant’s vehicle, and operated the vehicle.