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

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance with respect to the Category B Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each comprehensive motor vehicle insurance with respect to the Category B Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On August 3, 2013, around 06:55, the Plaintiff’s front part of the CA car volume (hereinafter “inward vehicle”) which was driven on the right side of the Plaintiff’s side, in violation of the stop signal at the front of the Hanyang apartment-dong 448-1 Hanyang apartment, the upper part of the CA car volume (hereinafter “inward vehicle”) going to the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in accordance with the new subparagraph.

(hereinafter referred to as “the first collision”). The first collision brought the vehicle on the part of the Plaintiff into the left-hand side due to the said first collision, and subsequently stopped after the Defendant’s vehicle, which was parked at the right-hand side of the running direction, shocked the rear-hand part of the vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “the second collision”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

In the instant accident, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle died, and D, who was accompanied by the chief of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, suffered injury in need of approximately 12 weeks of medical treatment.

The Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 76,585,060 in total with D’s treatment costs and agreed amount.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2 through 9 evidence, Gap 1 to 3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was illegally parked on the secondary line, which is only two-lanes, and it was caused by the occurrence and expansion of D’s damage to the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 22,975,518, which is equivalent to the fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle (30%) out of the above insurance money paid to D by the Plaintiff as the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, to the Plaintiff.

B. At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident conflicts with the non-party vehicle, which led to the collision between the latter and the latter, and the latter conflicts with the Defendant’s vehicle parked at the right edge of two-lane direction.