Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement for automobile with the Plaintiff’s taxi (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement for automobile bus with the Defendant Company E (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On February 21, 2019, around 19:15, C operated the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the road corresponding to the five-lane road in front of the Dong-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si is about four-lanes until the location of the instant accident. However, at the location near the instant accident, one-lane for left-hand turn is expanded and the location of the instant accident is about five-lanes.

The name of the lane shall be determined on the basis of the location of the accident of this case.

Among them, the four lanes were changed to five lanes in the direction of the office distance for education support in the library, and conflict with the defendant's vehicle driving behind five lanes in the same direction (hereinafter referred to as "accident in this case").

(c)

On March 13, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 484,570 to the passenger G who boarded the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident, and KRW 3,849,190 to the passenger H who boarded the Defendant’s vehicle on May 21, 2019, and KRW 5,223,510 to the passenger I who boarded the Defendant’s vehicle on October 16, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 8 through 11 (including the number of branches; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 4, or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle. Among them, the fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle was 20%. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a claim amounting to 20% of the respective medical expenses and agreement paid by the Plaintiff to the said passenger.

B. The determination is based on the evidence cited earlier, as follows.