2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to Aboard Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to B Emat Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant Motor Vehicle”).

B. On August 21, 2014, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle: (a) driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle on August 16:32, 2014; (b) conflict with the left part of the Defendant’s left-hand driving seat of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the left-hand driving seat of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, holding the Plaintiff’s vehicle two lanes in front of the right-hand edge of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, left-hand from the public health clinic in the front of the public health clinic, which is a four-lane-lane from the front side of the public health clinic, in front of the extension of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 1,922,360 to the Plaintiff’s driver of the vehicle with hospital treatment fees, agreement fees, etc.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, Eul evidence 1, 3, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the negligence ratio with the Defendant to the instant accident was agreed on 70% on the Plaintiff’s vehicle and 30% on the Defendant’s vehicle, and that the Defendant exempted the Defendant from liability within the scope of the insurance amount paid by the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Plaintiff acquired the right to indemnity against the Defendant, and the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the full amount of expenses for medical treatment when the amount after offsetting the negligence according to the automobile insurance clause falls short of the expenses for medical treatment. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 1,182,400 for medical treatment expenses. If the agreement on the above ratio of negligence is not recognized, 30% for the Defendant’s vehicle’s negligence in relation to the instant accident is recognized

B. (1) First, we examine whether the Plaintiff agreed on the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle with respect to the instant accident at 30%.