1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with C with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”). The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who entered into a mutual aid agreement with E with respect to F vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. G, as C’s son, driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle on November 3, 2017, around 00:30, while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and driving the five-lane 4-lanes in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju at the seat of Seo-gu, Seo-gu at the seat of Seo-gu, Paambrogate, along the four-lanes of the said road, received the part on the left back part of the Defendant’s vehicle parked at the five-lanes on the front side as the front part of the Plaintiff’s right-hand part.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

Around November 14:40 on November 6, 2017, H, who was on the top of the steering of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident, died of cerebral pressure from an I Hospital due to cerebral cerebralcular surgery, and was sustained by GD, a driver.

On January 11, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 307,745,540 to the J, which was the reference of the network H, and KRW 16,027,220 to the I Hospital on January 24, 2018.

In addition, on January 12, 2018, the Plaintiff paid the final agreement amount of KRW 1.2 million to G side.

E. The Defendant paid KRW 30,774,550 to the Plaintiff, and paid KRW 1,954,820 to the I Hospital, etc. as medical expenses.

F. G, the driver of the Plaintiff vehicle, was indicted for violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Death) by the Gwangju District Court 2017 Godan5395, and was finalized on February 8, 2018 by sentenceing two years of suspended execution on October 8, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 9, Eul evidence 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Article 37 of the Road Traffic Act requiring the driver of the defendant vehicle who alleged by the plaintiff to keep the vehicle at night due to the failure to turn on the headlights, sidelightss, tail lights, etc. while parking the vehicle at one five-lanes where it is impossible for the driver of the defendant vehicle to park.