1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.

1. Claim for unjust enrichment following the payment of insurance proceeds;

A. On February 13, 2018, the insured vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff vehicle”) Defendant Insured vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant vehicle”) (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant vehicle”) entered the Defendant’s insurance relation, such as the background of the accident, with the direction, etc. on the fourth-lane of the expressway, the vehicle of the Plaintiff on the instant accident entered into the Kimpo-IC and the direction, etc. on the direction of the four-lane of the expressway, in the direction of the Seoul metropolitan circulation road, Kimpo-Tool, at the

The upper part of the upper part of the E Bus, which is the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle entering a four-lane course while the Defendant’s vehicle is running in a three-lane, was shocked into the upper part of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the upper part of the upper part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which entered the four-lane road, was shocked into the upper part of the Defendant’s vehicle.

B. The Defendant filed a petition for deliberation with the committee for deliberation on indemnity insurance disputes, and the committee considered the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as 40%, and decided to pay KRW 7,348,000 to the Plaintiff.

On November 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking payment of the said money with unjust enrichment on the premise that the Plaintiff was not negligent within 14 days.

C. The first instance court rejected the Plaintiff’s claim on the same basis as the commission and the judgment of negligence.

However, the judgment of negligence in the first instance is not reasonable for the following reasons.

Before the accident of this case, the bus used direction direction, etc., and changed the two lanes from the two lanes to the three lanes, and the defendant's vehicle is overtaking the two lanes by changing the two lanes from the four lanes to the three lanes, and the bus changing the two lanes to the four lanes from the other damage, and the bus changed to the four lanes, and the plaintiff's vehicle was shocked and followed by the bus.

Around the time of overtaking a cargo vehicle, the plaintiff's vehicle was trying to turn on the direction direction on the right side of the road and enter the four-lane, and the immediately preceding case entered four-lanes of the vehicle.

. The above.