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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement for automobile damage compensation with respect to a vehicle A belonging to the Sung-si Partnership Company (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement for damage compensation with respect to the vehicle B belonging to the Dae-si Transport Company (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. Around 08:42 on March 15, 2013, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle with a blood alcohol level of 0.128% and 0.128% in front of the same transportation volume in the south-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the latter part of the reduction vehicle in front of the same transportation volume of the Yong-dong at the second-lane in front of the same transportation volume, facing the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, who was straighted by using the second-lane in the same room, string the side of the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, and re-influened the c vehicle parked in the electricity board and the car center.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

The Plaintiff paid the sum of KRW 14,941,640 to the Defendant vehicle passengers (D, E, F, G, and H), electricity board, and C’s repair costs, etc. as follows:

The amount paid for the payment of victims, etc. (won) D on March 22, 2013: 370,000 of medical expenses on March 22, 2013; 600,000 E on March 21, 2013; 530,000 of the agreed amount on March 20, 2013; 950,000 of the agreed amount on March 26, 2013; 380,000 of medical expenses on April 3, 2013; 950,000 of the agreed amount on March 26, 2013; 36,00,000 G evidence No. 1375, March 27, 2013; 2013. 5, 2013. 36, 2013.36, 205 of the evidence No.36136, Mar. 26, 2013

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The accident of this case, which caused the plaintiff, is caused by the concurrence between the negligence in violation of the duty of front-down and the duty of safe driving of the defendant vehicle. Thus, the defendant is obliged to compensate for 20% or 30% of the damage caused by the accident of this case.