1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to B vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”), and the Defendant is the passenger of C vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. D, a driver of the Plaintiff, was driven on March 5, 2015 at approximately 0.171% of alcohol concentration in blood, around 21:55, while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and was stopped in front of the Jung-gu, Jungdong, Jung-gu, Seoul, Seoul, and received the part on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 2,199,620 to the medical institution of the Defendant’s medical expenses from April 15, 2015 to July 30, 2015 in accordance with the comprehensive automobile insurance contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident did not cause the Defendant’s injury to the Defendant due to the minor contact, and the Defendant has continuously been treated from July 2014, the date of the instant accident, on which the instant accident occurred to the Defendant, as the medical treatment for the Defendant was not caused by the instant accident, but by the king, rather than by the instant accident.

Nevertheless, the plaintiff paid the medical expenses of the defendant. Since the defendant took unfair profits without any legal ground, the defendant is obligated to return the medical expenses of KRW 2,199,620 to the plaintiff.

B. The defendant's assertion was without merit since the defendant suffered from injury to salt, tension, etc. in light of the trend requiring approximately three weeks of medical treatment due to the accident of this case, and thus the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. In full view of the purport of the written evidence No. 2, the Defendant, who was on board the Defendant’s vehicle due to the instant accident, sustained injury such as salt, tension, etc. in need of treatment for about three weeks, and as a result, D, the Plaintiff’s driver, was punished by a fine of five million won due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.