1. The Defendant’s KRW 21,976,456 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from October 20, 2016 to October 11, 2018.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract, including a self-vehicle damage security, with respect to B automobiles owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) with A, and the Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to C vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

B. On April 5, 2016, around 02:30 on April 5, 2016, the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked near the “E convenience store” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D was behind the Defendant’s vehicle, and the Defendant’s vehicle left behind the vehicle, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle was faced with the front gate of the Defendant’s driver’s seat, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle was faced with the lower part

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

On October 19, 2016, the Plaintiff deducted the exemption amount of KRW 2 million and paid KRW 31.2 million to A with the insurance money for repair costs.

[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, 5, 8, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the facts of recognition of the Defendant’s obligation to pay the insurance proceeds, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff’s damages incurred by the Plaintiff’s loss due to the instant accident that occurred due to negligence committed by the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle due to his/her negligence in moving back the vehicle, as the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, and shall comply with the Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement who paid the insurance proceeds to A in accordance with Article 724(

B. According to the result of the court’s entrustment to appraiser F of the scope of damage, the repair cost of the Plaintiff vehicle is expected to require KRW 21,976,456.

The plaintiff asserts that the repair cost of the plaintiff's vehicle will be required to exceed the above recognition. However, in light of the result of the above entrustment of appraisal, it is difficult to believe that each entry of the evidence Nos. 4, 6, and 7 is difficult, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, the plaintiff's assertion of the part exceeding the above recognition is without merit.

C. The assertion of offsetting negligence.