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

Purport of claim and appeal

The defendant.

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff’s Bone Star vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”), for the Defendant is the insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On April 24, 2016, around 13:50, the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle stopped from the direction of the 2nd road located in the west-si, Seocheon-si to the west-si from the direction of the 2nd road located in the west-si, Seocheon-si, the driver discovered that the D Kazn vehicle (hereinafter “victim”) was stopped immediately and caused a traffic accident that conflicts twice with the backer of the damaged vehicle due to the front driver of the Defendant’s vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as “the primary accident”). After about 20 seconds from the first accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle behind the Defendant’s vehicle conflicts with the latter part of the Defendant’s vehicle with the front part, which led to the collision between the Defendant’s vehicle and the latter part of the vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “the second accident”), which led to the collision between the Defendant’s vehicle and the damaged vehicle in the future (hereinafter referred to as “the second accident”), and the accident degree is as shown in attached Form (A).

The plaintiff and the defendant filed a petition for deliberation with the committee for deliberation on the dispute over reimbursement of automobile insurance, and as a result of deliberation, 30% of the plaintiff vehicle's negligence and 70% of the defendant vehicle's negligence.

According to the above decision, the Plaintiff paid to the passengers of the damaged vehicle an amount equivalent to 30% of the negligence ratio and filed the instant lawsuit.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, 4, and 5, Gap evidence 2 and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s injury was entirely caused by the first accident caused by the Defendant’s vehicle, but the amount corresponding to 30% by the Plaintiff’s vehicle was unjust enrichment. As such, the Plaintiff sought against the Defendant for payment of the amount equivalent to 1,246,060 won and damages for delay as the return of unjust enrichment.

(2) The injury of the passengers injured by the Defendant is the Plaintiff’s vehicle.