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

B On April 5, 2014, around 17:20, while driving the Otoba (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff Otoba”) and driving the front road in front of E, located in Gyeongsung-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, the front part of the Defendant’s FObaba (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Oba”) on the part of the right side of the Plaintiff’s Obaba (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Oba”), where the two-lanes to one-lanes while changing the two-lanes from the two-lanes to the one-lanes.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The Plaintiff concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the G and H vehicles, which are children of B, from March 2, 2014 to March 2, 2015, with respect to the insurance period of non-insurance injury, etc. as to the non-insurance damage, and concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract between September 5, 2013 and September 5, 2014, with respect to the insurance period of B, other children, I and J vehicles, with respect to the non-insurance injury, etc.

B was injured by cerebrovascular, etc. due to the instant accident, and the Plaintiff paid insurance money in accordance with the terms and conditions of the automobile comprehensive insurance policy, which G and I subscribed to.

Meanwhile, the same fire and marine insurance company is an insurer which entered into an automobile insurance contract with K which is the fraud of B. From November 18, 2014 to December 16, 2015, paid the Plaintiff totaling KRW 12,736,88 (the amount corresponding to 1/8 of the amount paid by the Plaintiff to B) in accordance with the provision on allocation of duplicate insurance for non-life insurance for automobile insurance from November 18, 2014 to December 16, 2015, and filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the payment of the said indemnity against the Defendant, and received a favorable judgment in the first instance court where the said claim was proceeding by service (Supreme Court Decision 2015Da108854 Decided April 21, 2016). The appeal against the Defendant was dismissed (Seoul District Court Decision 2016Na57264 Decided May 11, 2017).

(Supreme Court Decision 2017Da232303 Decided July 27, 2017). 【In the absence of any dispute, the grounds for recognition, the evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number, if any) are included.