부당이득금
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
Plaintiff
The succeeding intervenor (Counterclaim Defendant) is against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with E with respect to D AWnd Automobiles (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Plaintiff’s successor is a company that fully succeeds to the rights and obligations under the insurance contract from the Plaintiff.
B. On May 4, 2014, around 14:35, at the location of the upper 362 km (on the last place of the Seoul East Eastern Highway), E driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driven it on three-lanes, and A driven the F vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”) and proceeded two-lanes behind the Plaintiff’s vehicle.
C. However, the upper left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the upper right side of the Defendant’s vehicle conflict, which led to the collision between the upper left side of the vehicle and the upper right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant’s vehicle shocked the central separation zone into one lane, and the four-lane streeted the four-lane road, and the accident occurred that led to the collision between the central separation zone and the two-lanes.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). D.
A from May 4, 2014 to the same year
6. Until 26. 26. Then, the Korea National University of Diplomatic Service was hospitalized at G Hospital, G Hospital, AH internal and external medical clinic, and Ineian medical clinic, under the name of the disease, such as the duplicating duplicating duplic of the
As an insurer of E, the Plaintiff is from July 3, 2014 to the same year.
8. Until 26.26. A paid 14,769,640 won as hospital treatment costs.
E. A died on November 19, 2015 when the first instance court was proceeding in the instant case after the lapse of one year and six months from the date of the instant accident ( May 4, 2014), and the Defendants were the children of the network A, and the Defendants were the children of the network A, and were the litigant after the first instance court rendered a judgment.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 8-1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff took the Plaintiff’s vehicle unilaterally while driving a two-lane from the Plaintiff’s vehicle behind the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and thereafter the Defendant’s vehicle is the Central Separation.