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

Based on the date and time of the traffic accident, the Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract (including a special agreement on injury security by an uninsurance vehicle) with C, D, and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the E (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”).

Around January 11, 2015, C’s husband F driven the Plaintiff’s wheels and passed the street in front of the H-cafeteria store located in Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon. Around January 201, 2015, the collision with the International Cargo (hereinafter referred to as “Nonindicted-gu”), which is going through by the central line on the opposite lane, followed by a traffic accident (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”) that conflicts on the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle parked on the right side of the right side of the direction.

The Plaintiff subscribed only to Non-Party 1, and paid 29,586,700 won in total to Non-Party 29,586,700 won for the medical expenses of Non-Party 1, according to the special agreement on coverage by Non-Party 1’s non-Party 1’s non-Party 1’s life insurance.

[Ground of recognition] The plaintiff asserted that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to Gap evidence No. 13, and the party who has caused the obligation to pay insurance proceeds, the driver of the defendant vehicle parked on the road side on which the parking of the defendant vehicle is not allowed, and the driver's negligence on the part of the defendant vehicle contributed to the occurrence of the accident of this case

The defendant asserts that there is no proximate causal relation between the illegal parking act of the defendant vehicle driver and the occurrence of the accident of this case, and did not contribute to the expansion of damage.

Judgment

In full view of the following circumstances, it cannot be deemed that the instant accident occurred due to the illegal parking of the Defendant vehicle, and furthermore, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant contributed to the expansion of damage.

The collision side of the non-party vehicle shall be the left side of the cargo vehicle.