beta
Text
1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to A vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who entered into an automobile mutual aid contract with respect to B vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).
B. Around 05:30 on November 5, 2013, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle in front of the D cafeteria located in Asan City (hereinafter “instant road”) and shocked the back part of the Defendant’s vehicle parked on the two-lanes while driving the Defendant’s vehicle along the two-lanes of Samsung C in the front of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, from the front screen to the Samsung C’s seat.
(hereinafter referred to as the “accident”. The Plaintiff’s vehicle was damaged due to the instant accident, and the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle died during treatment at around 11:55 on the same day as the low-blood shock is caused by the blood divers, prolonged maleculation, etc.
C. By December 30, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 45,355,460 to the Plaintiff’s driver of the instant vehicle, KRW 9,330,000, totaling KRW 1,268,000, totaling KRW 55,953,460, and KRW 1,268,00,00 for the Defendant’s vehicle.
The Plaintiff returned KRW 4,500,000 from the Defendant, and KRW 1,400,000 from the Defendant, and the remaining value of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, respectively, to Canadian Co., Ltd.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 6, 8 (for each number, including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, 8, and 1, 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The accident in this case occurred by the negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle parked on the road in this case without turning the width, etc. in the shape of a pipe, with the new wall of winter, and the negligence of the driver of the vehicle in this case was concurrently caused by the driver of the vehicle in this case. The above negligence ratio of the driver of the vehicle in this case is the same.