1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with A bus (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff bus”) as an insured automobile, and the Defendant is a person who has concluded an automobile mutual aid contract with B si (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant si”) as the beneficiary’s lane in the following manner.

Plaintiff

On June 10, 2015, around 19:40, the bus was cut down along the two lanes from the remote distance in the area of the Gosidong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Sungnam-si, to the two lanes, and the defendant taxi was found to change the two lanes from the three-lane to the two-lane, and accordingly, the bus became excessive beyond the C boarding of the plaintiff bus.

(B) The Plaintiff, as the insurer of the Plaintiff bus, paid KRW 23,107,060 in total to C with insurance proceeds.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, A1-5, B1-3, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s judgment as to the cause of the claim is based on the previous negligence of the Defendant taxi driver, since Defendant taxi was in the first four-lanes in the intersection and stopped rapidly through three-lanes, the Plaintiff’s driver of the Plaintiff bus driving the two-lanes had no choice but to make a sudden stop. Accordingly, the instant accident was caused by the previous negligence of the Defendant taxi driver.

Therefore, the plaintiff who paid insurance money to C is entitled to seek reimbursement of KRW 23,107,060 and delay damages against the defendant, who is the insurer of the defendant taxi, in accordance with the insurer subrogation doctrine under Article 682(1) of the Commercial Act.

However, the defendant taxi, who was parked in the three-lanes in front of the running direction, temporarily stops the two-lanes in order to avoid the entry into the three-lanes, but the two-lanes of the two-lanes and the three-lanes of the two-lanes.