1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The circumstances surrounding the instant accident are as follows.

On May 19, 2018, at the time of the accident, the insured vehicle CD at the time of the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, at the time of the accident, changed from the first to the second one on the road to the second one on May 19, 2018 at the time of the accident, the vehicle of the Plaintiff in the situation of the F&C collision in front of the E apartment of the Nam-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul to the second one on May 19, 2018. The vehicle of the Plaintiff, at the time of the accident, entered the two lanes from the first to the second one on the road, and the part on the front part on the right side of the Defendant vehicle. The vehicle of the Plaintiff, at the cost of the repair of the Defendant

B. As above, the Defendant paid KRW 2,065,401 at the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle, and filed a claim for reimbursement against the Plaintiff, and as the Plaintiff refused to comply therewith, the deliberation process was conducted by the committee for deliberation on the disputes over indemnity. The said committee recognized the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as 20% and decided to pay KRW 513,080 for indemnity, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 513,080 to the Defendant on September 7, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. While the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driving along the two-lanes of the three-lanes in the place where the accident occurred, the Defendant’s vehicle stops in the first two-lane, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle collision while changing its course rapidly into the second two-lane, the instant accident occurred due to the previous negligence of the Defendant’s driver, and the Plaintiff’s driver was not able to predict or avoid the said accident.

Therefore, the amount of KRW 513,080 paid by the Plaintiff first to the Defendant according to the decision of the committee for deliberation on disputes over indemnity that determined the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as 20% is the Defendant’s unjust enrichment without any legal ground, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to return

B. The driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is the Plaintiff.