1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with respect to A individual taxi (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer that entered into a motor vehicle insurance agreement with respect to B Oral Ba (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On December 7, 2015, at around 17:10, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was moving back the front side of Gyeyang-gu Incheon Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Cown from the Do 25 D branch to the E branch bank, and the part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which entered the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was shocked on the left side of the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle by making a sudden round-up from the Dalet parking lot on the front side of the front side.

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

On January 28, 2016, the Plaintiff paid 1,389,000 won to the Plaintiff’s vehicle in accordance with the said car mutual aid agreement, and requested the Defendant to claim the full amount of the repair cost on the premise of the Plaintiff’s exemption from the Plaintiff’s vehicle, but the Defendant did not comply with this, the Plaintiff filed a request for deliberation against the Defendant to the “The Committee for Deliberation on the Settlement of Automobile Insurance Disputes” on the premise that the ratio of the Plaintiff’s liability to the instant vehicle against the instant accident is zero percent.

The committee for deliberation on car insurance disputes has determined the ratio of responsibility of the plaintiff vehicle to 20% and the ratio of responsibility of the defendant vehicle to 80%.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 5, Eul 1 through 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion occurred by unilateral negligence on the part of the Defendant’s vehicle that immediately entered the upper side of the narrow width of the road by the vehicle parked in the second class in violation of Article 18(3) of the Road Traffic Act. As such, the Defendant, the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, is obligated to pay insurance money for the Plaintiff’s vehicle damages, which is the victim of the instant accident.

However, the Plaintiff exempted the Defendant from liability by compensating the Plaintiff for all damages incurred by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is the Plaintiff’s indemnity amounting to KRW 1,389,000.