beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: the plaintiff added to the corresponding part of the judgment as to the matters alleged in the trial of the court of first instance, and in the first instance part of the 11th part, "the defendant Eul's defense of extinctive prescription shall not exceed 4,982,690 won" is the same as the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except that "the defendant Eul's defense of extinctive prescription shall not exceed 4,982,690 won, only within the extent of 4,982,690 won." Thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of
“The Plaintiff asserts that subrogation is established against the total amount of the insurance money it paid, but in order to recognize subrogation against a third party by the insurer, the insurer is liable to pay insurance money to the insured. If an insurer pays insurance money to the insured even though the insurer did not have a duty to pay insurance money because it falls under losses not secured in an insurance contract, the insurer cannot exercise the right to claim compensation for damages of the insured in accordance with the legal principle of subrogation of the insurer (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da8716, Oct. 15, 2014).”
B. The part to be added following the 12th 8th 8th 8th 1707da176594-1 (the main lawsuit) and the 2007da350941 (the respondent in a counterclaim case is expected to exercise the plaintiff's right to indemnity). Thus, in this case, the plaintiff asserted that the completion of the extinctive prescription of the claim for indemnity is an abuse of rights against the principle of good faith, but the plaintiff's assertion on the premise that the plaintiff's right exists in the course of the lawsuit with the third party was not invoked in relation to the plaintiff.
It is difficult to view that the Plaintiff interfered with the exercise of rights, and otherwise.