1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a truck mutual aid agreement with respect to the A truck vehicle owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the C Carn (hereinafter “Defendant”) owned by B.

B. Around 16:40 on October 3, 2016, D driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle along the two-lane road near the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle while driving along the two-lane road near the front side of the two-lane road in Ansan-si, one of the 23.9km points in the direction of Pyeongtaek-si Highway. D stopped the side behind the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle parked on the front side of the Plaintiff’s front side.

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

The Defendant paid insurance money of KRW 2,300,000 to compensate for damages caused by the instant accident, and asserted that the instant accident occurred due to the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver, and filed a claim for dispute against the Plaintiff under the mutual agreement on the deliberation of the damage compensation claim under the said mutual agreement against the Plaintiff. On June 19, 2017, the committee for deliberation on the damage compensation amount recognized the ratio of liability of the Plaintiff’s driver to 100% and decided to pay KRW 2,300,000 of the insurance money that the Defendant paid to the Defendant.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,300,000 to the Defendant on June 27, 2017 according to the above decision of deliberation and coordination, and filed the instant lawsuit against the decision of deliberation and coordination.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 4, Gap evidence 5-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. (1) The accident of this case is one of the parties' arguments, and the defendant's vehicle was illegally parked in the safety zone of the expressway where the stopping of the vehicle is prohibited at the time.