1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,662,072 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from October 29, 2016 to November 17, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the Plaintiff’s vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who entered into a mutual aid agreement with the Defendant’s bus B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. C, around 04:50 on August 16, 2016, when driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the small direction entrance road located in the window dong-dong, Changwon-si, and driving on the small direction entrance road from the boundary of the tunnel at the surface of the tunnel, conflicts with the rear part of the Defendant’s vehicle that was parked on the road.

(hereinafter referred to as the "accident of this case")

Due to the instant accident, C died, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle was destroyed.

By October 28, 2016, the Plaintiff paid 8,420,000 won as compensation for the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and 169,890,360 won as compensation for the Plaintiff’s death, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 7, purport of whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's vehicle driver's negligence on the part of the defendant vehicle's vehicle driver's vehicle's vehicle driver's vehicle driver's negligence on the part of the defendant vehicle's vehicle driver's vehicle driver's vehicle driver's negligence on the part of the defendant vehicle's vehicle driver's vehicle's vehicle driver's negligence in not taking any safety measures, such as using emergency lights or installing a triangulation vehicle, etc. so that the vehicle driving in the future can find a parking vehicle at the new wall time, and violating the parking method and time limit. The defendant vehicle driver's negligence constitutes joint tort along with the driver's negligence of the plaintiff vehicle driver's vehicle, and the degree of contribution

B. The Defendant’s assertion did not have any obstacle at the time of the instant accident, and C, a driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, did not discover the Defendant’s vehicle parked on the road due to the stroke drive at the time of the accident, and was predicted at the rear.