2. Of the appeal costs, the part pertaining to the participation in the appeal is the intervenor joining the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with the Plaintiff’s Intervenor who is the insured, and the Defendant is a driver of a two-wheeled motor vehicle whose vehicle number is not known.

B. On January 26, 2015, at around 17:25, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor: (a) driven the said two-wheeled vehicle, and driven the said two-wheeled vehicle, and driven the intersection in front of the “E” located in Busan Jung-gu, Busan, to the Bupyeong-gu, Busan; and (b) caused an accident of collision with the Defendant’s two-wheeled vehicle (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”).

C. On February 23, 2015, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor was diagnosed by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, who was hospitalized in the F Hospital immediately after the instant traffic accident, for approximately 16 weeks of treatment at the said hospital, and was diagnosed by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, i.e., an interim 1/3 of the 16 weeks of treatment.

From March 27, 2015 to September 25, 2015, the Plaintiff paid the F Hospital, etc. totaling KRW 15,609,690 to the Plaintiff’s medical expenses.

E. On the other hand, on March 10, 2015, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor agreed with the Defendant to the effect that “A mutually agreed with each other in connection with the instant traffic accident and, as a result, a civil or criminal punishment against the perpetrator shall be submitted in an agreement that would not be original (hereinafter “instant agreement”) and received KRW 18 million from the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above basic facts, the instant traffic accident occurred due to the Defendant’s violation of signal. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, the insurer of the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, with the indemnity fee, according to the insurer subrogation under the main sentence of Article 682(1) of the Commercial Act.

B. On March 10, 2015, the Defendant entered into the instant agreement with the Plaintiff’s Intervenor regarding the instant traffic accident, and thereby, against the Defendant of the Plaintiff’s Intervenor.