beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.07.24 2018가단215170

손해배상(자)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 57,449,194 as well as 5% per annum from July 10, 2017 to July 24, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) The D Bus owned by C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicles”)

(E) On July 9, 2017, E driving on the top of the vehicle due to the negligence of failing to perform its duty of care, such as easing the shock of the vehicle while driving through a speed prevention zone, while driving on the eroscop, around 9:20 on July 9, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

(2) As a result, the Plaintiff suffered from the injury of the 2nd century. 2) The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement with the Defendant’s vehicle.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 11, Eul 5's entries (if there are additional numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition of liability, since the Plaintiff sustained injury due to the operation of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages caused by the instant accident.

C. The Plaintiff asserts that the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle was released the safety level by requesting the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle to walk the shoulder, and the Defendant was installed in the Defendant’s vehicle, which led to the Defendant’s failure to wear the safety level more than 50% of the Plaintiff’s negligence, on the ground that there is no reason to make such a request.

In light of the statement 11, the plaintiff can recognize the fact that the plaintiff tried to walk with the defendant's driver's request, and the video of Eul 4 alone is insufficient to reverse it, and there is no counter-proof otherwise.

However, the Plaintiff, after such a request, must promptly wear a safety bell and perform its duty of care to prevent a sudden shock from losing the balance of body in the event of a sudden shock, etc., but was somewhat negligent, the Defendant’s liability is limited to 90% in consideration of such circumstances.

2. The scope of liability for damages is below.