1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following amount:

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a non-profit special public corporation established for the purpose of improving national health and promoting social security by providing citizens with insurance benefits for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases, injuries, etc., and is the insured of the health insurance conducted by the Plaintiff as a person injured by the following accidents.

B. A around 15:40 on December 31, 2008, around 15:40 on the two-lane roads in front of the Dampo Apartment-dong Kim Jong-dong, Kim Jong-si, Kim Jong-si, and was in the atmosphere of signaling at the two-lanes.

On the other hand, B, as the driver of the Defendant’s comprehensive motor vehicle insurance vehicle C in salary C (hereinafter “the instant vehicle”), driven the instant vehicle and stopped on the same lane as A, and moved to the right side without turning on the direction of the right side. As a result, A, who was going to the right side, was driving on the instant vehicle, was faced with the development of the left side bridge, etc. on the back side of the instant vehicle, resulting in the injury, such as spine pipe flick, the left flick, etc. on the back side of the instant vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

In the instant accident, A was hospitalized in a hospital from December 31, 2008 to June 30, 2009, and received medical treatment. From January 20, 2009 to June 30, 2009, the medical care benefit cost incurred during the said period from January 20, 2009 to June 30, 2009, which was provided medical treatment as a health insurance, is KRW 12,426,270, and among them, A was charged KRW 2,017,050, the Plaintiff was paid KRW 10,409,220, respectively, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,409,220 to the hospital on July 31, 2009.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1 to 3, Gap evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that Gap acquired the right to claim damages against the defendant on behalf of the plaintiff, and the defendant constitutes 10,409.