부당이득금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. On March 21, 2017, including around 20.56: (a) on March 21, 2017, a claim for return of unjust enrichment relating to a traffic accident that occurred at the intersection of 6363 Spanco Poco Posco and Posco 1 (see attached accident site) at the south-gu coast; (b) the instant accident occurred; (c) the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the two-lanes of the instant intersection where the Plaintiff’s vehicle is able to turn back from the right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right right
(A) In the same situation as above, the plaintiff's vehicle is shocked by the defendant's vehicle without discovering the defendant's vehicle that was parked prior to the second lane because it did not take into account the traffic situation of the plaintiff's vehicle bypassing the second lane and operated the brake and steering gear by wrong operation of the steering gear and steering gear on the third lane. The negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle is larger than the negligence of the defendant vehicle. Although the plaintiff's vehicle is in a situation where the three-lanes are closed from the entrance at the time of the accident of this case, it is not impossible to use the three-lane at the point of the above intersection, but it is reasonable to view that the defendant's vehicle, which was proceeding at the rear of the plaintiff's vehicle, has a duty of care to yield the course to the plaintiff's vehicle moving along the second lane and drive safely. However, in light of the fact that the plaintiff's vehicle's vehicle has contributed to the accident of this case by changing its course to a three-lane lane, it is reasonable to see the rate of negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle.
3. However, the plaintiff's claim of this case is based on the decision of the committee for deliberation on disputes over indemnity out of the total repair cost of the defendant's vehicle paid by the defendant to the defendant 3,561,200 won.