[1] Where two or more motor vehicles covered by liability insurance jointly participate in a single accident, the scope of the insurer's liability

[2] In a case where Gap and Eul jointly participate in a single traffic accident, and Eul are the insurer of the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance and liability insurance for Eul as well as Eul's insurer of the liability insurance for Eul and Eul paid damages to the victims as Eul's insurer, the scope of the liability insurance amount to be deducted from Byung's indemnity amount

[1] Where two or more motor vehicles covered by liability insurance jointly cause an accident, each insurer shall be liable to pay the total amount of each insurer's liability insurance to the victim within the limit of the amount of damages suffered by the victim.

[2] In a case where Gap and Eul jointly participate in a single traffic accident and at the same time as the insurer of Eul's comprehensive motor vehicle insurance and liability insurance for Eul, and Byung paid damages to the victims as the insurer of Eul's liability insurance for Eul, Byung is liable to pay the total amount of the liability insurance amount to the victims as the insurer of Eul's liability insurance, and therefore, the amount to be deducted from Byung's indemnity amount is not the amount equivalent to the ratio of negligence of Gap among the liability insurance amount paid to Byung, but the total amount of the liability insurance amount to be paid to Byung.

[1] Article 5 of the former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Act No. 5793 of Feb. 5, 199); Article 3 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 16463 of Jun. 30, 199) / [2] Articles 425 (1) and 760 (1) of the Civil Act; Article 682 of the Commercial Act; Article 5 of the former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Act No. 5793 of Feb. 5, 199); Article 3 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 16463 of Jun. 30, 199)

[1] [2] Supreme Court en banc Decision 9Da38132 delivered on April 18, 2002 (Gong2002Sang, 1206) / [1] Supreme Court Decision 97Da2029 delivered on October 24, 1997

Han Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. (Attorney Han Sung-ho, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Defendant Lessee (Attorney Ba-Counterclaim et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Changwon District Court Decision 200Na8926, 8933 delivered on March 28, 2002

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Changwon District Court Panel Division.

The court below held that the plaintiff, as the insurer of the automobile comprehensive insurance and liability insurance against the non-party 1, paid 118,290,620 won to the non-party 2 and the non-party 1 as the insurer of the liability insurance against the defendant as the insurer of the non-party 1, the non-party 2 and the non-party 1 paid 118,290,620 won to the non-party 5 as the victim of the non-party 2, etc., and the liability insurance amount to be paid to the above victims is 24,20,000 won, and the defendant's fault ratio in the traffic accident of this case is 10%. Thus, the plaintiff can claim against the defendant the amount equivalent to the ratio of the defendant's fault, which is the remainder after deducting 24,290,620 won from the liability insurance amount jointly discharged by the plaintiff and the defendant.

However, in the event that two or more motor vehicles subscribed to liability insurance jointly cause an accident, each insurer is liable to pay the full amount of each insurer's liability insurance to the victim within the limit of the amount of damages suffered by the victim (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 9Da38132, Apr. 18, 2002). Therefore, in this case, the Plaintiff is liable to pay the full amount of the amount of liability insurance to the victims as the defendant's liability insurer's position. Therefore, the amount to be deducted from the amount of liability insurance paid by the Plaintiff to the defendant is not the amount equivalent to the defendant's fault ratio among the liability insurance

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to liability insurance and the scope of indemnity, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and the ground of appeal pointing this out has merit.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the court below.

Justices Lee Yong-woo (Presiding Justice)