1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1.The following facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in the entries in Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including the number with which each number is attached; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul evidence 1 and the whole purport of the pleadings. A.

On June 16, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with C and C with respect to the vehicles owned by C, and included a contract according to the terms and conditions of the non-insurance with which the insured and the family members of the registered insured receive injury due to the non-insurance without compensation.

(hereinafter referred to as the insurance contract of this case)

On June 6, 2012, E leased the Defendant’s electric scooter (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant’s vehicle) from Defendant B who operates the electric scooter lending business, and then deliver the Defendant’s vehicle to Defendant A, and the Defendant’s vehicle did not subscribe to the automobile insurance.

C. On June 6, 2012, Defendant A driven the Defendant’s vehicle without a motorcycle driver’s license on June 14:50, and proceeded with the parking lot in the front-dong and front-dong, Busan, to the direction where the vehicle entry blocking devices are installed on the same side of the parking lot, Defendant A neglected to perform the duty of front-way and front-way and front-way watching, thereby causing injury to F by shocking the motherF of C who was seated on the right-hand side of the moving-in blocking direction.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). D.

The Plaintiff paid to F the insurance money of KRW 27,024,280,00 in total, KRW 17,046,840, and KRW 27,024,280, based on the terms and conditions of the instant insurance contract’s non-insurance coverage.

E. Meanwhile, F entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to two motor vehicles owned by it, which includes a special agreement for injury security by each non-insured motor vehicle, with respect to the two motor vehicles owned by it. On February 28, 2013, the Plaintiff is liable for reimbursement of KRW 17,905,220, on the ground that it is a double insurer.