beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.14 2017나49784

구상금

Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 12, 2016, around 16:25, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is driving along the 49-do 1st line down to the south-gu Incheon Metropolitan City downstream, which was stopped on the road, and was overtaking the said vehicle to find out and avoid any unexpected vehicle parked on the road. In order to avoid this, there was a traffic accident in which the part of the lower part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which is collision with the part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On November 10, 2016, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,749,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

The Plaintiff filed a petition with the Defendant for deliberation by the committee for deliberation on indemnity disputes (hereinafter referred to as the “Deliberation Committee”), and the Deliberation Committee decided on January 23, 2017 on the charge ratio of the original Defendant’s vehicle in relation to the instant accident at 40:60.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 5, 7, 8, Eul’s 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Plaintiff’s vehicle is running across half the center line in which the Plaintiff’s vehicle is under a stop on the road of the first lane, and the Defendant’s vehicle is trying to overtake the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the non-motor vehicle in an unreasonable manner by entirely impairing the center line. As such, the Defendant’s fault ratio of the Defendant’s driver who contributed to the instant accident exceeds 90%.

B. The defendant's assertion is that the plaintiff's vehicle is in the traffic on the left and right while the defendant's vehicle had already been driven by the center line in order to overtake the plaintiff's vehicle.