A. (1) On November 5, 2012, A has caused traffic accidents, A is the freight of salary B, at around 18:00, KRW 18:00 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

)를 운전하여 안산시 상록구 본오동 신안아파트 앞 편도 2차로 도로 중 1차로를 따라 본오중학교 쪽에서 미즈피아 산부인과 쪽으로 주행하고 있었다. 당시 그 도로 중앙선 부근에는 도로를 건너던 C이 멈춰서 있었는데 A는 이를 보지 못하고 피고 차량의 앞부분으로 C을 들이받았다. 2) D은 E 베르나 승용차(다음부터 ‘원고 차량’이라고 한다)를 운전하여 그곳 반대쪽으로 1차로를 따라 가고 있었는데 피고 차량에 치인 C이 튕겨져서 원고 차량의 운전석 펜더 부분에 부딪쳤다.

B. The Defendant’s payment of the insurance money and the Plaintiff’s reimbursement against the Defendant 1) In a traffic accident, C suffered from injury, such as credit ties, and the Defendant paid the insurance money of KRW 289,608,930 to compensate for the damage, etc. to the Defendant as the insurer of the Defendant vehicle. 2) The Defendant also filed an application for deliberation on the automobile accident with the Plaintiff, who is the insurer of the Plaintiff, for the deliberation of the automobile accident, filed an application for deliberation with the committee for deliberation on the automobile accident compensation claim with the Plaintiff, which is the insurer of the Plaintiff, and the deliberation committee determined that the ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s negligence is 20%, the Plaintiff paid KRW 57,921,780, May 11,

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 7 evidence, Eul 1 evidence and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. It is difficult to deem that there was an error that caused a traffic accident to D operating the Plaintiff vehicle.

Therefore, the defendant should return it to the plaintiff, because the plaintiff's claim for reimbursement paid to the defendant based on D's negligence is unjust.

The facts revealed in accordance with the above trusted evidence are as follows.

At the time of the traffic accident, the defendant's vehicle, who was driven in one lane, was placed at the time of the traffic accident.