1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement to compensate for damage caused by an accident in the course of operation with respect to Daegu Asi (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer that entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On August 31, 2013, while driving a road around 16:00 in front of DD located in Daegu Northern-gu, Daegu Northern-gu, and driving the road in front of D in front of D 70 in the direction of the long-distance direction, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven the front part of the E-wheeled Vehicle (hereinafter “the instant two-wheeled Vehicle”) in front of the Plaintiff’s right side by driving the vehicle on the roadway in front of the Plaintiff’s right side (hereinafter “the instant accident”). Accordingly, the F who driven the instant two-wheeled Vehicle and G who is the said passenger suffered injury.

C. At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was parked on the road on the right side of the said collision point.

The Plaintiff paid mutual aid money to F and G as indicated below.

The amount paid at the time of payment (won) on October 24, 2013, the amount paid at the H Hospital Medical Treatment Costs of 300,110, October 29, 2013, the agreed amount calculated and paid on November 21, 2013, by calculating the amount equivalent to 40% of the amount of damage the H Hospital Medical Treatment Costs of 2,885,780, Nov. 21, 2013, H Hospital Medical Treatment Costs of 2,885,780, Jan. 16, 2014, the H Hospital Medical Treatment Costs of 577,560, Oct. 11, 2013.

On March 19, 2014, the sum of the agreed amount of 550,000 won and the medical expenses of 140,320 won paid from the insurance company of the two-wheeled vehicle of this case, the insurance company of the two-wheeled vehicle of this case, and 40% of the total of 690,320 won, which are the negligence ratio of the plaintiff vehicle of this case.

Total 7,955,570 / [Reasons for Recognition] Fact that there is no dispute, each entry or video of Gap evidence 1 through 9 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff.