1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer running automobile insurance, who has entered into an automobile insurance contract for C vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), and the Defendant also is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with D vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) as an insurer.

B. On January 24, 2019, when the Plaintiff’s vehicle came to turn to the left at the intersection near the F station located in the area of the party branch in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, the vehicle turned to the left at the same direction two lanes, the Defendant’s vehicle, who was going to the left at the same direction, also went to the left, and the front and front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was shocked by the front and front part of the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The circumstances at the time of the accident are as follows:

C. On March 20, 2019, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,596,090 (the self-paid 398,000) at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 7, Eul 5, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The fault ratio of the instant accident

A. The plaintiff asserted that the accident in this case occurred because the defendant's vehicle, who took a two-lane turn to the left at the right turn at a one-lane in the intersection of the plaintiff, is too small to turn to the left at the right turn.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case occurred because the plaintiff's vehicle did not turn to the left almost right angle, but rather, the plaintiff's vehicle did not turn to the right right angle, and caused the accident of this case.

B. In light of the following circumstances where the purport of the entire argument can be seen in the images of evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 1 of evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 1, the instant accident is also smaller than the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that made a large turn to the left while failing to properly observe the vehicle guidance line.