beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 39,348,280 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from December 11, 2019 to August 28, 2020 for the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;
2. Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act (Judgment by public notice) of the applicable provisions of Acts;
3. The Plaintiff partially dismissed portion: (a) paid KRW 17,348,280 to C Co., Ltd. within the scope of liability insurance coverage; (b) KRW 22,00,000 within the scope of liability insurance coverage out of the insurance amount paid to victims E; and (c) paid KRW 630,000 to F Co., Ltd. on December 10, 2019; and (d) sought payment of KRW 39,978,580 in total by subrogation of the beneficiaries pursuant to Article 682 of the Commercial Act against the Defendant.
However, in order to recognize subrogation by the insurer against a third party as stipulated in Article 682(1) of the Commercial Act, the insurer should be liable for paying insurance money to the insured, and even if the insurer has no liability to pay insurance money because it falls under the non-security damage in the insurance contract, if the insurer pays the insurance money to the insured, the insurer cannot exercise the right to claim compensation by subrogation against the insured in accordance
(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Plaintiff’s claim for compensation against the Defendant, a third party, may be filed on behalf of the Plaintiff and G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), on the ground that the Plaintiff’s claim for compensation was based on a mutual aid agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), and that the Plaintiff’s claim for compensation was based on a third party’s subrogation, as the Plaintiff’s claim for compensation was based on a mutual aid agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff”).
However, since there is no evidence that the plaintiff's 630,000 won paid to law firm F constituted damages for which the mutual aid contract concluded between the plaintiff and G was secured, the plaintiff's claim for compensation for this part is without merit