beta
(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2017.07.11 2016가단12261

손해배상(자)

Text

1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally serve as the Plaintiff KRW 33,227,43 and as a result, from September 4, 2015 to July 11, 2017.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On September 4, 2015, Defendant B: (a) around 12:18, Sept. 4, 2015, the amount of the instant accident vehicle C’s car (hereinafter “instant accident vehicle”).

() A traffic accident in front of the bus platform in front of the bus platform in front of the Cr. B. A. B. driving a vehicle in front of the C. B. B. and driving the bus platform in front of the C. C. C. A. B., while driving the vehicle in front of the C. B. B., it was not found that D. B. driving the vehicle in front of the C. B. B.C. and driving the vehicle in front of the C. B. B.P., the vehicle in front of the C. B.P. driving by the C.

2) The Plaintiff suffered injury due to the instant traffic accident, such as the pressure pressure duplicating, cerebral wave, duplicative telegraph, etc. No. 8, which requires subsequent treatment and treatment, due to the instant traffic accident.

3) Defendant lot Loss Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”)

(B) The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the instant vehicle. (b) According to the facts of recognition as the basis of the liability, Defendant B is a person who committed the instant tort, and the Defendant Company is jointly and severally liable for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the instant traffic accident. (c) According to the fact of recognition as the liability limitation, the Plaintiff is deemed to have attempted to make an illegal internship on the road where the U.S. is prohibited. Therefore, in calculating the amount of damages that the Defendant would compensate for, it is reasonable to consider in calculating the amount of damages that the Defendant would compensate. However, in light of all the circumstances, such as the occurrence of the instant traffic accident, it is reasonable to view that the ratio was 30%, and thus, the Defendant’s liability is limited to 70%. [In the event that there is no ground for recognition, evidence Nos. 1 through

2. Except as otherwise stated below within the scope of the liability for damages, it shall be as stated in the attached Table of Calculation of Damages.

(c) the accounts shall be less than 1: