구상금
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 59,00,000 and its amount from September 22, 1998 to July 2001.
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The facts of recognition 1) around 23:00 on July 21, 1998, the Defendant was negligent in performing the duty of 125 cc Orala in the front direction while driving a road in front of the Seongbuk-dong, Dong-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, which was not a liability insurance, and caused the death of the front right part of the Oralab (hereinafter “the instant accident”).
(2) At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff paid KRW 60 million to the heir on September 21, 1998, as an agent for performing the business of guaranteeing motor vehicle accident compensation entrusted with authority by the Minister of Construction and Transportation, who is a business of guaranteeing motor vehicle accident compensation, pursuant to Article 14(4) of the former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (wholly amended by Act No. 5793, Feb. 5, 199).
3) After that, the Plaintiff filed an order against the Defendant with the Jeonju District Court No. 2001 tea5094 to claim the reimbursement of the above insurance money, and on July 19, 2001, the payment order order of the Plaintiff stating that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 60 million won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from September 22, 1998 to the service date of the original copy of the instant payment order, and 25% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment” (hereinafter “instant payment order”).
The payment order was served on the Defendant on July 23, 2001 and became final and conclusive on August 7, 2001. [The fact that there is no dispute over the basis of recognition, the entries in Gap evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]
B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 59 million as claimed by the plaintiff among the amount of KRW 60 million for indemnity, except in extenuating circumstances.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense, etc.
A. The defendant's defense that the plaintiff's claim for indemnity expired by prescription is examined as follows.