1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants exceeding the money ordered to be paid under the following subparagraphs shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation regarding the instant case is as follows: ① “(1) of the first instance judgment,” “(2013 senior group3082) of the third first instance judgment,” “(2013 senior group3082) of the first instance judgment,” “(2015 senior group3 senior group3072) of the said judgment,” and “ July 2, 2015” of the said part(2) of the “1st judgment,” respectively.

In addition to the Plaintiff’s payment of mutual aid money and the Defendants’ return of unjust enrichment, the part concerning the Defendants’ return of unjust enrichment is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

B. The Plaintiff’s payment of mutual-aid money is a mutual-aid business entity that entered into a mutual-aid agreement with the owner of the instant bus for the purpose of transferring damage caused by the loss under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act. Under the said mutual-aid agreement, the Plaintiff stated that the Plaintiff paid KRW 12,697,750 on September 12, 2014 to the Central University Hospital, Rascar Medical Center, and Rascar Medical Center treating the Deceased on behalf of the Deceased or the Deceased, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 2 from June 18, 2013 to September 16, 2014. However, subparagraph 4 stated that the Plaintiff paid KRW 12,697,750 on September 16, 2014.

A total of 138,33,820 won was paid for treatment expenses, and ② from October 14, 2014 to March 20, 2015, a total of 66,370,840 won was paid for treatment expenses and damages.

4. The plaintiff, who is a mutual aid project operator in bad traffic according to the defendants' unjust enrichment, paid the deceased's medical expenses and mutual aid money under the name of the deceased's damage compensation, and the deceased's heir (the part on the money paid after the deceased's death) obtained benefits equivalent to the above mutual aid money without any legal ground, and thereby the plaintiff suffered losses equivalent to the same amount. Thus, the defendants, the deceased's heir, are inherited from the deceased.