beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.02.08 2016가단5180071

손해배상(자)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 37,166,297 as well as 5% per annum from November 20, 2015 to February 8, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition (1) around 11:00 on November 20, 2015, C parked a e-car (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) without properly manipulating a parking hub on the road in front of the shop in Gyeyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”). As a result, the Plaintiff, who was located on the front section of the Defendant vehicle, was faced with the front section of the Defendant vehicle.

(2) The Plaintiff suffered injury, such as an injury to the upper left-hand side, the upper right-side bed salt, the left-hand bed, the left-hand bed part, and the back-round bed part.

(3) The defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the defendant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 5, 6, Eul evidence or video (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.

C. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff should recognize the plaintiff's mistake and limit the defendant's responsibility because the accident of this case occurred from the accident of this case, which occurred on the roadway, not the delivery of India, since the plaintiff had an accident of this case on the roadway.

In light of the above facts, the accident of this case is not a serious accident that the plaintiff was in motion, but an accident that the driver of the defendant's vehicle did not work properly, and thus, it is not reasonable to view that the plaintiff affected the occurrence of the accident that the plaintiff caused the accident of this case on the roadway because the driver of the defendant's vehicle did not work properly.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is not accepted.

2. In addition to the matters stated below within the scope of liability for damages, it shall be as follows, and the period for the convenience of calculation shall be as follows: