1. The Defendant’s KRW 40,579,190 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from April 3, 2019 to January 30, 2020.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 13:40 on February 10, 2017, Nonparty C driving D-si (hereinafter “Plaintiff-Vehicle”) and proceeding three-lanes of the three-lanes in front of the Gu Seo-gu Seo-gu Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, about 50km in the Sin-gu office room in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, the Plaintiff was the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, who was crossinged without permission from the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the right side.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

The instant accident occurred on March 12, 2017, E was killed with a multi-soft long-term care (hereinafter “the deceased”) while receiving treatment from a hospital due to external depression, etc. on the part of March 12, 2017.

The defendant is the deceased's mother's heir of his property, and the plaintiff is the mutual aid business operator who entered into a mutual aid agreement for the plaintiff's vehicle.

On May 15, 2017, the Plaintiff paid total of KRW 40,579,190 to a hospital treated by the Deceased for hospitalized treatment, etc.

E. However, as the facts charged by C’s negligence in the course of driving and causing the death of the deceased, the Defendant was indicted for violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and was charged with a criminal trial. The appellate court in the criminal trial found the deceased’s unauthorized crossing in advance in light of the following: (i) the deceased’s moving direction (the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driven in three lanes) on the left-hand side at the time of departure of the vehicle parked in the first and second lanes due to a signal change; (ii) the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the driver of the vehicle, could not have anticipated this exceptional situation that the vehicle would flow off more than five lanes in the opposite one in the opposite one in the situation; and (ii) the running speed of the vehicle at the time of crossing without the permission of the deceased would reach more than two and up to three lanes; and (iii) it was reasonable to view that C had discovered the deceased and not passed until the collision.

(b).