A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to a motor vehicle set forth in A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to B cargo set forth (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. Around 22:00 on November 14, 2013, while driving a vehicle on the part of the Plaintiff on the part of the Plaintiff, driving a two-lane in the middle of the three-lane near the north orchard and the intersections adjacent to the Yong-do Highway, which was rapidly stopped after changing the three-lane to the three-lane, and D having been on the part of the Defendant, driving three-lanes on the rear side of the Plaintiff, suffered injury.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

By February 12, 2014, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,778,450 in total with D’s medical treatment costs and agreed amount.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the negligence of the driver of the defendant's vehicle who neglected his duty in the front line was partly contributed to the occurrence of the instant accident.

On the other hand, the defendant asserted that the accident of this case occurred by the whole negligence of the driver of the vehicle on the part of the plaintiff who stopped immediately after the change of the lane on the expressway, and that the driver of the vehicle on the part of the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim, since there

3. Where a person who operates a judgment-based motor vehicle has injured another person by such operation, he/she shall be liable to compensate for the damage;

Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (main sentence of Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act): Provided, That a driver may be exempted from liability only if he/she proves that he/she has not neglected to pay attention to the operation of an automobile, that he/she has intentionally or negligently caused a third party

(The proviso of the same article). Therefore, D due to the operation of the Defendant’s vehicle, knife, and the instant case.