1. The Defendant: KRW 19,67,160 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from June 13, 2013 to August 10, 2016.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with C, which is towing vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”).

B. Around 19:40 on March 4, 2013, the Defendant’s vehicle stopped on the side (on the side side from the road on the road on the road between ICT and ICT on the five-lane road, which is the five-lane road, and it conflicts with the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving the five-lane while entering the road.

At the time, D bargaining cars, E Poter freight cars, and other towing vehicles were stopped on the side of the road, and the defendant vehicle which was stopped later entered the road into the lane and the part of the front side of the vehicle of the plaintiff was collisioned with the front side of the vehicle of the defendant vehicle after the driver's seat.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant accident”). The instant accident caused damage to the vehicles and D vehicles standing on the side while pushing the Defendant’s vehicle into the right side after the shocking of the vehicle, and shocking the vehicle and D vehicles on the side. The vehicles suffered damage due to the left side of the vehicle from the left side to the seat of the driver’s seat, and D vehicles suffered injury to the back side of the left side of the vehicle.

C. From April 1, 2013 to April 8, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 24,583,950 for the repair cost of the damaged vehicle ( KRW 1,15,700 for D vehicle repair cost, KRW 668,250 for E vehicle, KRW 22,760,00 for Plaintiff vehicle).

[Reasons for Recognition] The absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Gap evidence Nos. 6 through 8, Gap evidence Nos. 12 and 13 (including paper numbers), fact-finding for the first district patrol zone of the Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency, the results of appraiser F's appraisal, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As to the circumstance of the occurrence of a claim for indemnity, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s vehicle entered the road from the side to the five-lanes, and the Defendant asserted that the Defendant’s vehicle in normal driving is congested behind the Plaintiff’s vehicle after completing the entry into the road.

A health unit, .