beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.24 2014나21228

구상금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with A with respect to B vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”). The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to C vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On December 2, 2012, at around 08:47, the Plaintiff’s vehicle: (a) discovered a vehicle parked in the front bank due to an accident while driving in the vicinity of the Southern East-gu, Southern-si, the head of the Sinwon-si, the Sucheon-do Office of Road, and (b) was urgently operated, but the ice is dissatisfed, and thus, the vehicle in the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle conflicts with the said stop vehicle (hereinafter “the first accident”); and (b) the Defendant’s vehicle driven in the rear side again conflicts with the rear side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “the second accident”).

C. In relation to the second accident, the Defendant filed a request for deliberation with the committee for deliberation on the dispute over reimbursement of automobile insurance, and the said deliberation committee decided on August 12, 2013 as 30% of the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and 70% of the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Plaintiff

On January 11, 2013, the vehicle was destroyed by the front part of the vehicle and the front part of the vehicle due to the second accident. The vehicle was destroyed to the extent that the repair is impossible, and the vehicle was scrapped. Accordingly, on January 11, 2013, the Plaintiff calculated to A the amount calculated by deducting the sales amount of 28,700,000 won from the value of the vehicle after scrapping the vehicle as KRW 62,10,000 and paid as insurance money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 5, 6, Eul evidence 3-4, video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The estimated repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the second accident was calculated as KRW 69,280,00 in the front part due to the second accident, and the amount of damages incurred after the second accident was calculated as KRW 26,50,000 in the front part due to the second accident. The total amount of damages (= KRW 69,280,000 in the upper part) is within KRW 95,780,000 in the upper part (= KRW 26,50,000 in the upper part) within the limit of KRW 98,450,00 in the value of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the Defendant’s vehicle out of the amount of damages incurred by the Plaintiff.