1. The Defendant’s KRW 21,751,80 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from December 30, 2017 to September 3, 2019, and the following.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automatic insurance contract for D non-Mable vehicles 520D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”). The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who entered into a mutual aid agreement for E rocketing taxi (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. Around 18:25 on November 20, 2017, F (F) driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle, driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle into South and North Korea, and driving the three-lane of the intersection of the Western River in Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu, and the Defendant’s vehicle driving the Plaintiff’s front line of the G (56 years old, male) with the two-lane of the front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not turn on the direction direction, but changed the lane from approximately 20 meters away from the front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the first lane.

F은 경적을 울리면서 브레이크를 밟았으나 사고를 피하지 못하고 피고 차량의 좌측 측면 부분을 원고 차량의 우측 앞부분으로 충돌하고, 이어서 앞으로 비스듬히 튕겨나가 우전방 2차로에서 신호대기로 정차 중인 스포티지 차량의 좌측 뒷범퍼를 원고 차량의 좌측 앞범퍼로 다시 추돌하였다

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The restriction speed of the said road was 60km per hour, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding at a speed of approximately 111.8km per hour immediately before the instant accident.

At the time, weather was clear and the surface was dried, and the view was good at night.

Plaintiff

On the one-lane in which the vehicle is driving along, the vehicle of the plaintiff was able to increase the speed due to the lack of the vehicle on the front side. However, on the two-lane, the vehicle was driving along the front line due to the large number of vehicles and the signal of the front line.

C. The Plaintiff, as an insurer with respect to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, paid KRW 36,253,00,000 insurance proceeds by December 29, 2017, with the insurance proceeds, etc. due to the Plaintiff’s total damages within the scope of reasonable damages.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1-7 or video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the allegations and facts established on the basis of judgment, the Plaintiff is an insurer of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.