1. The Defendant’s KRW 6,891,411 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from May 31, 2014 to November 12, 2015.

1. The fact of recognition is that the Plaintiff and A enter into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to Bi40 vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”), and the Defendant are the insurers who entered into the automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to Cunst vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

A, around 19:17 on October 18, 2012, when driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle along the three-lane of the 315.6km west Coastal Road 315.6km in the direction of the 4-lane, the vehicle of the Defendant’s vehicle was not verified and the course of the D was changed to the four-lane, and due to the negligence of changing the course of the Defendant’s vehicle into the four-lane, and caused injury, such as serious brain or brain damage, etc., less than D.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). A was indicted on the charge of causing the instant accident by negligence in the course of his/her duties and causing serious injury to D. On January 22, 2014, the Suwon District Court sentenced A to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment without prison labor for six months (No. 2013 high-ranking4662). A appealed against the said judgment, but the said court dismissed the appeal (No. 2014 high-ranking715) and became final and conclusive as it is.

After the instant accident, the Defendant paid D insurance proceeds to the Plaintiff, and filed a claim for reimbursement with the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 68,914,110 to the Defendant by May 30, 2014.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, A1 through 5, 7, 8, 1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. At the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, not just because the Plaintiff’s vehicle, as the Defendant at the time of the instant accident, was changing the course to that of his driving, and thus, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was at the time of the instant accident, and thus, at the same time, at the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, could have avoided the instant accident if it had driven safely by reducing its speed.