1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered under paragraph (2) shall be revoked, and that part shall be revoked.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who is entrusted by the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport with the Government’s business of guaranteeing motor vehicle accident compensation within the limit of liability insurance under Article 30(1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (hereinafter “Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation Act”) where another person is injured due to the operation of a motor vehicle not covered by liability insurance or liability mutual aid under Article 5(1) of the same Act.

B. At around 09:20 on May 19, 2017, C was driving a road front of the D market in the Namwon-si, Namwon-si (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) and driving the road in the direction of the direction of the marketing distance from the boundary of the market, and the road in front of the D market in the direction of the vehicle for the E-driving, which is crossing the crosswalk from the right side of the vehicle for the Defendant vehicle to the left side (hereinafter “E vehicle”).

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The instant accident occurred in G hospital, etc. by suffering from injury, such as a pelvisor on the left-hand side, and received hospitalized treatment, etc.

Types of payment date 1.50,150 won for direct non-payment treatment expenses on July 4, 2017; 6,124,630 won for direct non-payment treatment expenses on August 31, 2017; 325,220 won for agreement on August 31, 2017

C. By August 31, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,000,00,000 as follows, as compensation for government-guaranteed projects under Article 30(1) of the Automobile Damage Act, to E, who suffered injuries by Defendant-Free Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “instant compensation”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Gap evidence 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the ground of the Plaintiff’s claim

A. According to the facts of recognition of the occurrence of the right of indemnity, the Defendant, the owner of the Defendant’s vehicle, is liable for damages against E as an operator pursuant to Article 3 of the Automobile Loss Act, and the Plaintiff shall pay the instant compensation to E, and against the Defendant of E pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Automobile Loss Act.