1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff ordering payment is revoked.

The defendant shall make the plaintiff 1,600.

1. Basic facts - The plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with C as an agent driving company.

The Defendant entered into a substitute driving contract with C, a proxy driving company, as the owner of D vehicles (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”).

On April 8, 2014, E, an employee of C in accordance with the above agency driving contract, driven the Defendant’s vehicle on April 13:30, 2014, and passed the central line to overtake the F vehicle that is first located in the four-lane radius in the location of the wife, and used to pass the vehicle first on the road, and used the vehicle to pass the vehicle back to the central line. As a result, the victim G and H suffered injury on the said vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident.” On April 9, 2014, the Plaintiff paid the victims totaling KRW 1,980,000, each of KRW 990,000 as damages.

The injury of the victims falls under class 14 of the injury under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and the limit of the liability insurance amount is KRW 800,000, respectively, and the liability insurance amount is a total of KRW 1,600,000 (hereinafter “liability insurance amount”).

However, the above agency driver's comprehensive automobile insurance contract provides that it compensates for damages exceeding the liability amount corresponding to the liability insurance (personal injury I).

2. The key issue is that the Plaintiff’s payment of the liability insurance in this case as compensation for damages not secured in the above substitute driving car insurance contract constitutes management of the Defendant’s business, and thus, it should be returned as unjust enrichment.

The Defendant: (1) The Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity is subrogated of the victims’ right to claim compensation; (2) the extinctive prescription has expired prior to the Plaintiff’s filing of the instant lawsuit; or (3) the operation control and operation profit of the Defendant’s vehicle are entirely transferred between the Defendant who is a party to the substitute driving contract and the substitute driving company.