beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.14 2016나40841

구상금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The defendant.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The reasons to be stated in this part shall be cited by the main text of Article 450 of the Civil Procedure Act in the part “1. Basic Facts” of the judgment of the court of first instance, but shall be corrected to “00:50 on January 14, 2015” as “0:50 on October 25, 2014” on the date of the accident referred to in paragraph (a).

The defendant, who is the owner of the vehicle of this case alleged by the plaintiff, is liable for the damages caused by the accident of this case as an operator under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act.

The defendant asserted that he borrowed the name of the vehicle of this case upon E's request and did not participate in the operation of the vehicle of this case.

E purchased and operated the instant vehicle in the name of the Defendant and disposed of at will, and thereafter, the co-defendant A of the first instance trial incurred an accident while acquiring and driving the instant vehicle. Therefore, the Defendant is not liable as an operator.

If the owner of a motor vehicle permits another person to operate a motor vehicle under the name of the owner until the completion of the registration of change in the name of the owner, the said owner shall be liable for the operation of the motor vehicle (see Supreme Court Decision 94Da38212, Jan. 12, 1995). However, in a specific operation causing an accident, where there are special circumstances to deem that the person who leased the ownership on the registration ledger of the motor vehicle lost the control of the operation of the motor vehicle and the profits from the operation of the motor vehicle, the said nominal owner is not liable for the said accident (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da37138, Sept. 10, 2009). Whether the control of the operation and the profits from the operation are lost or not shall be determined based on objective and objective social norms, such as the situation in which the operation is possible regardless of the owner’s intent, the personal relationship between the owner and the motor vehicle, whether the driver intended to return the motor vehicle, the possibility of obtaining consent from the owner after without permission, and recognition of the victim.