1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff ordering payment is revoked.

The defendant shall make the plaintiff 1,426.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with the Plaintiff Company A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with the Defendant Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

B. On June 21, 2016, around 08:58, the Defendant vehicle, while driving a two-lane of the road front of the department store in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant road”), conflicts between the left side of the Plaintiff vehicle running in the same direction and the right side of the Defendant vehicle.

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

On August 5, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 9,511,600 as insurance money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, video, purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion;

A. The Plaintiff’s alleged vehicle was in progress in a three-lane. While the Defendant’s vehicle was driving more than that of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the Plaintiff’s alleged vehicle was placed in a three-lane driver’s attention. Accordingly, the part following the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was shocked to the left-hand white part.

Therefore, the accident of this case is based on the defendant's negligence, and the defendant is obligated to pay 9,511,600 won and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant had been driving normally in the two-lanes, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle that had been driving in the three-lanes changed the vehicle line to the two-lanes, and the instant accident occurred due to contact with the Defendant’s chief class of the driver’s seat of the Plaintiff vehicle.

Therefore, the defendant is not liable for the accident of this case.

3. According to the above evidence, the defendant vehicle proceeds in the two-lanes of the road of this case and the plaintiff vehicle proceeds in the same direction as the three-lanes of the road of this case. However, the defendant vehicle was affected by the two-lanes from the three-lanes, which led to this, the part following the left-hand side of the plaintiff vehicle to the left-hand white part.