1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to Asi (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer that entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On May 5, 2014, around 00:20 on May 5, 2014, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven one lane in the direction of the shooting distance of the hospital located in the front of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, in the direction of the station station located in the direction of the station station located in the direction of the station station located in the direction of the station station located in the direction of the station station in the south-gu, Seoul, and the Defendant’s front gate of the Defendant’s vehicle running along the two lanes of the two lanes between the four-lanes of the vehicle, in violation of signals

(hereinafter “instant accident”). At the time of the instant accident, the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle was under the influence of alcohol 0.088% of the blood alcohol concentration.

C. The instant accident inflicted injury on D and E, the passenger of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,896,200 to D for the purpose of agreement and treatment by November 4, 2014, and KRW 118,332,160 to E, respectively.

After the accident occurred, the Plaintiff and the Defendant set the negligence ratio of the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver of the instant vehicle to 80:20, and the Defendant, on November 24, 2014, remitted the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 1,579,240 (=7,896,200 x 20%) corresponding to the Defendant’s fault ratio among the mutual aid money paid to D by the Plaintiff on November 24, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including the number of each branch; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, video and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Inasmuch as a settlement contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the part of the Defendant regarding the instant accident was concluded with the content that set forth 20% of the Defendant’s negligence, the Defendant paid 23,66,432 won as the amount of indemnity under the said settlement contract (i.e., total amount of insurance proceeds paid by the Plaintiff to E 118,332,160 x the Defendant’s fault ratio 20% and delay damages.