1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On September 4, 2016, around 13:40, the Plaintiff’s vehicle: (a) was driven along the two lanes in order to enter the road of the same number of Plaintiff, a prior vehicle; and (b) due to its shock, the Defendant’s vehicle concealed the vehicle C, a prior vehicle (hereinafter “victim”) (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

C. From September 20, 2016 to November 23, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,622,630 of the insurance money to the passenger D and the driver E (hereinafter “victims”) for the purpose of medical treatment and agreement.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, 8, 9, 11 (if a party has a serial number, including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5, Gap evidence Nos. 5, 6 and 7, Eul evidence Nos. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Before the Plaintiff’s assertion occurred, the Defendant’s vehicle: (a) concealed the damaged vehicle first; and (b) the Plaintiff’s vehicle concealed the Defendant’s vehicle, and the instant accident occurred while leaving the vehicle again; (c) accordingly, the victims’ damages conflict with the shock caused by the instant accident and the shock caused by the drilling of the Defendant vehicle prior to the instant accident.

Since the Plaintiff, the insurer of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, compensates the victims for all damages, the Defendant, the insurer of the Defendant vehicle, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the indemnity for the part of the Defendant’s driver’s liability, who is the joint

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the vehicle was running slowly from the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was protruding to the other Plaintiff’s vehicle, is nothing more than towing the damaged vehicle on a chain before the instant accident occurred.