구상금
The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff corresponding to the order to pay below shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”). The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to E vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).
B. On January 15, 2019, around 22:00, in the underground parking lot of the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F building: (a) an accident was caused by the Plaintiff’s vehicle transferred to the center left side of the passage of the first floor underground while the Defendant’s vehicle was going from the second floor underground to the first floor underground (hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. The Defendant paid KRW 526,300 (except for KRW 200,00) at the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle due to the instant accident, and applied for deliberation and coordination against the Plaintiff to G Deliberation Committee (hereinafter “Deliberation Committee”). On August 26, 2019, the Deliberation Committee decided that the ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle’s vehicle’s fault to the instant accident was 70%:30%; on September 18, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 508,410 [the amount calculated by adding the said repair cost to the Defendant’s repair cost to KRW 70%) ( KRW 508,410, which is 726,300 ( KRW 526,300,000) x 70%].
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 10, video, purport of whole pleading
2. Determination
A. First of all, there seems to be a negligence in progress by the driver of the Defendant vehicle due to the negligence on the front side at the time of the instant accident.
However, the above evidence, in particular, as the light light, which is up to the ceiling of the entrance into the first floor immediately before the accident of this case, is turned on, the plaintiff's driver, as the vehicle driver, knew or could have known in advance that the defendant's vehicle was up from the second floor above the ground, and the underground parking lot, which is the above accident place, also needs to ensure smooth traffic as a place where a large number of vehicles pass through, and the vehicle is not the center right side. The plaintiff's vehicle is not the center right side but the left side part.