beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. At around 14:32 on August 6, 2012, C, while driving the otoba and driving the oba and driving the intersection at the intersection without the front signal apparatus of the D Apartment at Yangju City, C was faced with an accident shocking to the F vehicle of the E-driving, which left left at the above intersection (hereinafter “instant accident”), and suffered injury, such as the brain side side of the right side, the external lebroid, and the blood transfusion outside the e-mail.
B. C filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, who is an insurance company of Lives Vehicle, to claim compensation for damages arising from the instant accident, as the District Court Decision 2014Da6343, Aug. 26, 2016, the said court rendered a judgment on August 26, 2016 that “The Plaintiff shall pay to C 95,452,476 won, and the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from August 6, 2012 to August 6, 2016, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “the first judgment in the prior lawsuit”).
C. On October 26, 2016, upon the declaration of provisional execution by the first instance judgment of the first instance court, the Plaintiff paid KRW 117,249,630 to G attorney-at-law, and on October 28, 2016, G attorney transferred KRW 59,749,630 out of the above money to the account in the name of the Defendant (H cooperative account number I) under C’s spouse.
On June 1, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed against the judgment of the first instance court of the prior suit, and accordingly proceeded with the District Court Decision 2016Na57711, the appellate court held on June 1, 2017, that “C shall return KRW 20,000,000, out of the provisional payment amount received according to the judgment of the first instance court of the prior suit, until July 31, 2017, and C shall pay the unpaid amount plus damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the date of payment until the date of full payment.” The above decision became final and conclusive as it did not raise any objection.
E. On August 25, 2017, the Plaintiff’s claim against C based on the decision in lieu of the above conciliation is a preserved claim.