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

B. The date and time of the instant accident: At around 17:50 on April 27, 2018, the place where the accident occurred: At least 2 Dong-dong, Jung-gu, Seoul.

C. The Plaintiff’s vehicle was in progress on the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the instant accident, and the Defendant’s vehicle attempted to change the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s seat and the right part of the back part of the Defendant vehicle conflict (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) The instant accident occurred after approximately five seconds after the Defendant’s vehicle started to change the lane, and immediately after the Defendant’s vehicle entered the two lanes, the instant accident occurred.

3) At the time of the instant accident, both the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle were driven slowly. D. The Plaintiff paid KRW 3,529,080 as insurance money, other than KRW 50,000,000, in accordance with the payment criteria for self-paid vehicle damage security among the automobile insurance clause with the Plaintiff’s owner of the vehicle. [Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute any dispute, and the entries and videos (including serial numbers, and the purport of the entire pleadings) in the items of subparagraphs A through 6, A, and B, and B, and the entire purport of the pleadings.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff is the cause of the claim in this case. The accident in this case occurred concurrently between the plaintiff's vehicle and the defendant's vehicle's negligence, and the negligence ratio is 30:70, while the defendant asserts that the accident in this case occurred by the whole negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the developments leading up to the occurrence of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle and Defendant’s vehicle in the instant accident.