1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part arising between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles driven by the Plaintiff Intervenor (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to E vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On November 10, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle conflict with the Defendant’s vehicle, who is straight along three-lanes on the opposite three-lane road while making the left turn at the intersection located in front of the former F apartment at the Ansan-si around 08:52.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On March 5, 2018, the committee for deliberation on disputes over indemnity claims filed by the Defendant regarding the instant accident (hereinafter referred to as the “subcommittee”) rendered a deliberation and resolution on the charge ratio of the Plaintiff vehicle to 80% and the charge ratio of the Defendant vehicle to 20% (hereinafter referred to as the “instant decision”). D.

On March 22, 2018, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant KRW 1,579,440 equivalent to 80% of the fault ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle calculated by the instant decision among the total damages of Defendant’s vehicle due to the instant accident, 1,974,300.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 6, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to the total negligence of Defendant vehicle, and thus, the percentage of negligence determined in the instant decision was mistakenly calculated.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to KRW 1,579,440 paid from the Plaintiff according to the percentage of fault determined in the instant decision to the Plaintiff.

B. In full view of the following circumstances, in light of the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings as seen earlier, and the background leading up to the instant accident, the conflict failure, and the structure, form, and degree of damage of the road where the accident occurred, the instant accident was committed concurrently by the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle.