1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below is revoked, and above.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement with the Plaintiff Company A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer of the comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the Defendant’s C Car owned by B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On December 25, 2016, the driver of the Defendant vehicle driven the Defendant vehicle at around 13:30 on December 25, 2016, and proceeded along the intersection in front of the Busan Shipping Daegu, Busan, along the two-lanes of the 4-lane road from the sea-side bank to the Dong-side bank, along the two-lanes of the four-lane road. In line with the three-lane in the same direction, the left side part of the Plaintiff vehicle that was driven ahead of the Defendant vehicle was shocked to the right side of the Defendant vehicle

(hereinafter “instant accident”) There is a dispute between the parties as to the circumstances in which the instant accident occurred.

C. On May 22, 2017, the dispute deliberation committee filed a request with the Plaintiff for deliberation by the committee for deliberation on the dispute over the reimbursement of automobile insurance (hereinafter “Dispute Deliberation Committee”). On May 22, 2017, the dispute deliberation committee separately decided the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver on the instant accident at 10%, and the negligence of the Defendant’s driver on the vehicle.

Accordingly, on July 10, 2017, the Dispute Deliberation Committee requested re-deliberation and decided on July 10, 2017 the negligence of the driver of the Plaintiff and the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle as 50%, on the ground that the other party’s vehicle was alleged to have attempted to change the lane, but there is insufficient objective data.

On August 2, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 900,000, which is equivalent to the fault ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle according to the decision of the Dispute Deliberation Committee among the insurance money paid by the Defendant to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant indemnity”).

E. Meanwhile, Article 26(2) of the “Mutual Agreement on the Deliberation of Disputes over Claims for Compensation against Automobile Insurance”, which serves as the basis for the dispute deliberation committee, refers to a lawsuit claiming the return of unjust enrichment against the claimant after performing the same obligation as the order of mediation by the deliberation committee.