1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle B at first hand (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”).

B. On April 8, 2011, at around 17:55, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven the three lanes of the three-lane road near the Chungcheongnam-dong, Jung-gu, Seoul, Jung-gu, and the two-lanes of the two-lanes, and the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the vehicle, and there was an accident of collision with the Dbenz vehicles driven by Nonparty C (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

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

At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff paid the insurance proceeds of KRW 2,927,50, the sum of KRW 2,200,000 for medical expenses and KRW 5,127,590 for the agreed amount and KRW 2,200,00 for the Defendant’s vehicle, and KRW 1,408,000 for the agreed amount and KRW 1,20,000 for the agreed amount until April 25, 2011.

However, from February 19, 2010 to January 12, 2012, including the instant accident, C was sentenced to imprisonment of one year and four months with prison labor (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012No2342) from the Seoul Central District Court on September 27, 2012, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 13, 2012, on the following grounds: (a) even though the facts of the instant accident, including the instant accident, were 30 times through a traffic accident, were not affected by a traffic accident; (b) was inflicted an injury, and (c) was by deceiving or deceiving insurance companies by taking medical treatment at a hospital; (d) however, (e) did not bring about such intent due to a cause such as refusal of payment by an insurance company; (b) was a crime of fraud and attempted

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 6, significant facts in this court, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged in light of the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim and the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, namely, ① the plaintiff vehicle has a considerable distance from the defendant vehicle driving the two lanes in changing the vehicle from the three lanes to the two lanes at the time of the accident of this case.