1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 76,416,368 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its amount from May 5, 2015 to July 21, 2015.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. At around 16:45 on August 18, 201, B, driving a C Poter II cargo vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff trucking vehicle”), there was an accident that conflicts with Defendant’s U.S. driver’s Oba (hereinafter “Defendant Oba”), which was proceeding on the left-hand side while driving in one lane near the building distance in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. The Defendant suffered brain damage, such as climatic transfusion, etc. due to the instant accident, and the Plaintiff was an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with B on the Plaintiff Cargo Vehicles, and paid KRW 95,520,460 to the Defendant with medical expenses, etc.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 11, Eul evidence Nos. 4, 5, and 11 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the accident of this case occurred due to the whole negligence of the defendant, and the defendant should return the medical expenses received from the plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. The Defendant’s assertion B caused the instant accident by negligence without examining the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s cargo vehicle, and thus, the Plaintiff is liable to compensate the Defendant for all damages incurred by the instant accident.

3. Determination

A. 1) In fact, Gap evidence Nos. 6-5, 6, and 7-8 through 11, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 4, and 6 (including the serial number, each of the entries, images, and witness D's testimony), comprehensively taking into account the purport of the whole pleadings, the accident of this case occurred at the point where the plaintiff's cargo vehicle attempted to hold a U-turn in accordance with the new subparagraph, and the accident of this case occurred at the same one-lane, which occurred on the left side of the plaintiff's cargo vehicle and the driver's seat in front, the left-hand part of the plaintiff's cargo vehicle's driver's seat, and the accident of this case occurred by the plaintiff's fault that attempted to hold a U-turn by changing the sudden line from the two-lane.