The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

2. From September 4, 2019 to January 12, 2021, the Defendant: (a) KRW 66,000 to the Plaintiff and its related matters.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement with Csi (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer that entered into a motor vehicle insurance contract with D (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On June 7, 2018, around 18:04, an accident occurred in front of F Mart in Seoul E, while the driver of the Defendant vehicle, who was parked on the side of the road, brought about an accident that shocks the right side of the Plaintiff vehicle, which was slowly cut down on the left side of the driver’s seat (hereinafter “accident”).

(c)

The Defendant paid KRW 530,000 at the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

On July 29, 2019, the Committee applied for the adjustment of deliberation to the G Deliberation Committee. On July 29, 2019, the rate of negligence on the Plaintiff’s vehicle and Defendant’s vehicle was 20%: 80%.

On August 20, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 66,000 to the Defendant in accordance with the above order, and filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on August 21, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the video and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The evidence as seen earlier, in particular, various circumstances revealed by images at the time of the instant accident, namely, at the time of the said accident, the Defendant’s vehicle was stopped in the area where alcohol is prohibited, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle was traveling toward the Defendant’s vehicle while lowering the speed. However, the Defendant’s driver opened the front door of the driver’s seat toward the Defendant’s own road (it appears that the Defendant’s driver did not confirm in advance the vehicle going behind by the rear, etc.). In particular, under the circumstances at the time, it would have been virtually impossible to avoid the door of the Defendant’s own vehicle in front of the nearest distance.