A. At around 19:00 on February 19, 2010, I driven a C-wing vehicle (hereinafter “A-wing vehicle”) and caused a contact accident leading to Defendant’s driver’s car moving to the same direction while bypassing it through the intersection near the home distance in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with the owner B with respect to the Ghana vehicle.

C. On February 20, 2010, the Defendant was hospitalized in the E-mail department located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and was diagnosed on February 24, 2010 at the light salt pansium (hereinafter “the instant injury”), which requires around three weeks’ medical treatment, and received hospital treatment until March 26, 2010. After receiving hospital treatment, the Defendant received hospital treatment at F Chinese Council members, G Glym, and H hospital, etc.

After the instant accident, the Plaintiff paid totaling KRW 37,239,700 as the Defendant’s medical expenses, including KRW 7,239,700, and KRW 30,000 as the provisional payment to the Defendant from November 9, 2010 to April 5, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1 through 6, Eul's evidence 3 (including number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant’s main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant injury suffered by the Defendant was based on the king, and there is no proximate causal relation with the instant accident.

Even if the accident of this case was low, the defendant is obligated to return the amount stated in the purport of the claim to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment among KRW 37,239,700 already received from the plaintiff.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is as follows: (a) hospitalized treatment was conducted during the period exceeding one month while suffering from light fright, due to the instant accident; (b) however, (c) the symptoms were not good, and (d) towing was provided as an escape certificate, and the towing was provided intermittently; and (d) the Defendant received outpatient treatment up to now. Furthermore, the Defendant is prior to the instant accident.