The part against the plaintiff falling under the amount ordered to be paid under the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the automobile C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), with respect to D vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 9, 2018, around 19:21, the Plaintiff’s front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which was directly located on the right side of the running direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, were in conflict with each other.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

On December 28, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 9,97,000,00 calculated by subtracting 20% of the amount of damages within the maximum of KRW 500,000,000 under the insurance contract among the costs of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle from the insured of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry or video of Gap evidence 1, 3-6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s instant accident occurred due to the Plaintiff’s primary fault, which occurred due to the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s failure to stop or speed up, even though the Defendant’s vehicle should yield the course to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, even though the Defendant’s vehicle was entering the intersection at the time of traffic control, and the Defendant’s fault ratio at least 70% should be assessed. 2) The Defendant’s instant accident occurred due to the Plaintiff’s fault ratio, even though the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the Plaintiff’s driving direction at the time of traffic control, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not temporarily stop a wide range of road due to a road driving through the intersection where the Plaintiff’s vehicle had no traffic control but to yield the course to the Defendant’s vehicle, which first entered the intersection and without speeding. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s fault was attributable to the Plaintiff’s fault.

B. The evidence, in particular, evidence Nos. 4, 6, and 6, as indicated earlier, are included in the judgment No. 1.