1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the Plaintiff KRW 39,040 against the Defendant and its related thereto from November 7, 2013 to April 1, 2015.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle B (hereinafter “Defendant Oba”).

B. On August 29, 2013, at around 11:06, C, driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and entered the Daegu Suwon-gu Dtel parking lot (hereinafter “instant parking lot”). At the time, vehicles are parked on the passage of the parking lot at the time, and the passage of the vehicle was obstructed by the central line, and the Defendant Oba, who was bypass, was going to proceed to the exit of the parking lot from the opposite direction to the parking lot exit in order to proceed to the parking lot exit in the direction of the parking lot.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On November 6, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 195,200 as insurance money for the Plaintiff’s vehicle damages caused by the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The accident of this case occurred by the negligence of the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle who driven the passage of the vehicle running along the center line, in violation of the duty of care and safety, and due to the negligence of the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle driving the Defendant Oralb, and due to the negligence of the driver of the Defendant Oralbow, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the percentage of the driver’s negligence among the insurance money paid by the Plaintiff in connection with the accident of this case

B. The Defendant’s instant accident is due to the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle operating a vehicle driving in the course of going through the central line, and it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s driver could have anticipated the Plaintiff’s vehicle to proceed as above and could avoid the instant accident. As such, in the instant accident, the Defendant’s negligence on the part of the Plaintiff’s driver.