1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”). The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who entered into a car mutual aid agreement with respect to D Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”). Around July 18:35, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle conflict with the Defendant’s vehicle in the middle of left-hand turn at the intersection where no signal, etc. was sent near the Fridge located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul, Geumcheon-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant accident”). During this process, the Plaintiff’s driver G suffered an injury of “erode, tension, etc. in light of erode, kne, etc., and H suffered an injury of “mane and other detailed parts of erode, tension, etc.”

C. By August 16, 2017, the Plaintiff paid the amount of KRW 3,459,50 [the amount of KRW 2,500 agreed upon at 959,500 for treatment expenses (the amount of KRW 2,300 for future treatment expenses)] and KRW 2,746,160 for H [the amount of KRW 1,50 for medical treatment expenses 1,246,160 for 1,50,000 for the amount of KRW 200,000 for the injury materials (the amount of KRW 1,30,000 for the future treatment expenses)], total of KRW 6,205,660 for insurance proceeds.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff paid the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident as the insurance money, and thereafter filed a claim for reimbursement against the Defendant with the Seoul Central District Court 2018 Ghana1457319. On April 19, 2018, the said court rendered a decision in lieu of partial acceptance of the Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement on the ground that the ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle’s fault to the instant accident was 80:20, and the said decision became final and conclusive on May 9, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 5,805,660,00 to G and H in accordance with the proviso of Article 3(1)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (hereinafter “instant proviso”).