1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation part.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), and the Defendant is the insurer of B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On March 3, 2016, around 18:10, the Plaintiff’s vehicle attempted to change its bus lines from one lane to two lanes on the D-W in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul. The Plaintiff’s vehicle intending to change its bus lines from one lane to two lanes, and the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle was shocked with the front part of the front line.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

In relation to the instant accident, the Defendant filed a petition with the Defendant for deliberation of the committee for deliberation on the dispute over reimbursement of automobile insurance with respect to the claim of reimbursement with the Plaintiff, which was based on the payment of insurance money of KRW 6,603,920 as the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the decision of deliberation on the instant accident was made (90% negligence on the Plaintiff’s vehicle: 10% negligence on the

The closing date of the instant decision is November 17, 2016, 14 days after the date when both the Plaintiff and the Defendant were deemed to have received the notice of decision, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not make a request for reexamination and file a lawsuit under the instant mutual agreement until the closing date.

E. On January 15, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a written request to the Defendant for exclusion from the obligation to compensate for disputes regarding the instant accident, and the Defendant’s reply to the said written request does not clearly state his/her consent or disapproval.

F. On January 20, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5,943,530 to the Defendant according to the above decision, and filed the instant lawsuit on January 23, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 10, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the party’s assertion is equivalent to KRW 2,325,040, out of the repair cost that the Plaintiff received from the Plaintiff by repairing the Defendant’s vehicle and repairing the parts unrelated to the instant accident, such as the rear door and the rear part of the driver’s seat.