beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.31 2017가단5055844

구상금

Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 16,402,130 with respect to the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from June 24, 2016 to July 31, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant A is an employee of Defendant Collaborative Motor Vehicle Services Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Collaborative Motor Vehicle”).

On June 19, 2015, Defendant A driven the Defendant’s vehicle B (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”) which completed repair on or around 17:00 and turned back to the right side of the front school at the 39-occinal gum of Busan in order to transfer the Defendant’s vehicle to the owner, Defendant C (hereinafter “victims”) who dried the road beyond a few in the crosswalk at the front side of the occinal elementary school at the front side of the occinal elementary school at the front side of the occinal elementary school at the front side of the occinal road at the front side of the occinal road at the above Defendant’s vehicle, and suffered the injury, such as the

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

The above accident place is a three-distance house in the apartment and the vicinity of an elementary school and is a narrow road where the central line is not opened, and where the main line is passed as the defendant's vehicle, and where the left-hand turn is made in the direction of the main elementary school and the left-hand turn, the front-distance part and the left-hand turn shall be completed, and a crosswalk without any signal lights are installed at the place where it is installed, and the vehicle speed is limited to 30K at the speed as the children protection zone around an elementary school.

On the other hand, the three-distance distance from the accident site of this case is a road that allows only pedestrians to walk in the direction of a stop, and from the standpoint of the vehicle, it is possible to walk from the side to the moving elementary school as it is, and the victim also has come to the three-distance from the road along the exclusive road of pedestrians as it is, according to the scam system, the road was under the direction of the vehicle to the moving elementary school of this case.

C. The Plaintiff entered into an automobile insurance contract with Nonparty E and F vehicles, as above.