구상금
1. The application for participation by the Plaintiff’s assistant intervenor and the appeal shall be dismissed in entirety;
2. The supplementary cost and the cost of appeal.
1. Determination on the legitimacy of the Plaintiff’s motion to intervene in the Plaintiff’s Intervenor’s motion to intervene and the instant appeal
A. (i) The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with respect to the E-car owned by D (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) between D and D, and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to F Kaman vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).
around 15:00 on February 27, 2018, the driver of the Shelled vehicle changed the two lanes to the two lanes, while proceeding from the area of the west-dong to the area of the fish tunnel by side of the two lanes near the 2162 (Seong-dong) in Yangju-ro, Yangju-ro, the driver of the Sheeted the two lanes of the Plaintiff’s Intervenor (hereinafter referred to as “the Intervenor”), who followed the two lanes in the same direction as the Defendant’s vehicle, followed the left part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle by the driver of the Plaintiff’s auxiliary vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “the Intervenor”), who followed the two lanes in the same direction as the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the upper direction and the left part.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident.” On March 23, 2018, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant, who is the insurer of the Defendant vehicle, for payment of KRW 404,730, which is the amount equivalent to the said insurance money, and the amount of compensation for delay damages, on May 4, 2018.
Applicant On July 17, 2018, the first instance court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff that “The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 364,257 won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from March 24, 2018 to July 17, 2018, and 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.”
(v) On August 2, 2018, the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not appeal all of the judgment of the first instance, but submitted a petition of appeal to the effect that the supplementary intervenor filed an application for participation in the instant case, and at the same time, the supplementary intervenor is dissatisfied with the part of the judgment of the first instance.
recognized.