1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On May 23, 2016, at around 17:40, the Defendant’s vehicle driven along the two lanes from the five-lanes in front of the ambicheon Apartment apartment, which led to a change of the four-lanes in order to move the four-lanes to the right side of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”). In order to turn back the four-lanes, the Plaintiff’s driver’s seat located in the four-lanes, which led to a change of the four-lanes.

Due to the above accident, C driver of the defendant vehicle suffered injuries, such as cerebral lele, which requires medical treatment for 14 days.

C. On June 16, 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 1,300,00,000 as the agreed amount, including KRW 246,610, and KRW 1,684,40 as the hospital treatment cost on July 29, 2016.

On July 21, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,931,010 to the Defendant as the amount of reimbursement upon the Defendant’s claim for medical expenses.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including branch numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s instant accident occurred due to the total negligence of the Defendant’s driver, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,931,010 to the Defendant as the amount of reimbursement. As such, the Defendant shall return the said amount of reimbursement to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. The instant accident is not caused by the previous negligence of the Defendant’s driver, and KRW 1,931,010 paid by the Defendant constitutes the victim’s medical expenses under the proviso of Article 3(1)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Automobile Accident Compensation Insurance Act with automobile injury insurance money, and thus, the Plaintiff should bear the burden.

3. Determination

(a)won;