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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On March 8, 2016, around 11:50, the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the parking lot from the opposite side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was a traffic accident where the Defendant’s vehicle, who entered the parking lot from the opposite side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was shocked on the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On April 12, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the insured KRW 112,400 as the repair cost for the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred due to the full negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle, and that the plaintiff exempted the defendant by compensating the loss of the plaintiff's insured and acquired by subrogation the right to claim compensation against the defendant in accordance with the insurer's subrogation doctrine, the defendant is liable to pay the insurance money and the compensation for delay to the plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case occurred between the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff vehicle and the negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle. Thus, the defendant did not pay the amount equivalent to the negligence ratio of the driver of the plaintiff vehicle among the indemnity amount claimed by the plaintiff.

B. According to the video of the evidence No. 3, according to the following: (i) the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driven in the ground direction according to the revolving route of the underground parking lot at the time of the instant accident; and (ii) the Defendant’s vehicle was driven in the part near underground floor in the underground direction in each direction above the underground direction; and (iii) the Plaintiff’s driver at the time discovered the Defendant vehicle coming from the adjacent part and set it toward the right side.