1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. With respect to the Plaintiff’s C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s Vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to D Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant’s Vehicle”).

B. On July 10, 2017, around 13:48, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driving along the border road near Daegu-gu ICT located in the North Daegu-gu along a single lane, such as a summary map at the scene of the accident, and the left-hand part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which entered the two lanes from the two lanes to the one lane, was shocked into the front part of the right-hand part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

C. The Defendant filed a request with the Plaintiff for deliberation at the indemnity payment deliberation committee, and the deliberation and resolution was made on December 18, 2017 upon the request for deliberation.

The decision is that the traffic accident occurred due to the negligence of both the plaintiff and the defendant, and the negligence ratio is 50:50.

On January 11, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5,158,500 to the Defendant according to the above deliberation and conciliation decision.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4 through 9, Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The committee for deliberation on the dispute over indemnity of the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion recognized the ratio of fault liability between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle for the said traffic accident as 50:50, but the said traffic accident occurred due to the total negligence of the Defendant’s driver.

Therefore, the defendant who received KRW 5,158,500 from the plaintiff according to the above deliberation and resolution shall pay the plaintiff 5,158,500 and delay damages for the return of unjust enrichment.

B. In full view of the background leading up to the occurrence of the foregoing traffic accident, the location of the original and the Defendant vehicle at the time of the accident, and the degree of the collision, which can be seen by the evidence revealed prior to the above recognized facts, the said traffic accident is attributable to the negligence of the Defendant’s driver, who was somewhat urgent from the second line to the first line at the time of the accident, and the duty of front-time and safe driving.