beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.24 2017나21137

구상금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On July 29, 2016, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven along the two lanes of the three-lane road in front of the Yong-dong, Yong-dong, Yong-dong, Yong-dong, the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the first lane stopped in front of the Plaintiff’s vehicle while driving along the first lane, and there was a traffic accident where the collision between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s upper right-hand part of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. The Plaintiff paid the Plaintiff’s driver C a total of KRW 98,370 and KRW 500,000,000, for treatment costs of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driver who suffered injury in the treatment days due to the instant accident.

【Fact-finding without dispute over the ground for recognition】 The evidence Nos. 1 through 9 (including the branch number in the case of additional number), Eul’s each entry and video, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the accident of this case occurred from the two-lane to the one-lane, since the defendant's vehicle, who followed the plaintiff's vehicle, was forced to overtake the plaintiff's vehicle, and it was caused by the sudden stop without any reason. Thus, the fault ratio of the defendant's vehicle is more than 80%.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case occurred due to the plaintiff's unilateral negligence while trying to change the vehicle line in a narrow space between vehicles, and that the insurance amount paid by the plaintiff to C is not appropriate.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence as follows, namely, ① the Plaintiff’s vehicle is already entering the two-lanes from the two-lanes of the three-lanes to the one-lanes, and the vehicle is already entering the one-lanes of a considerable part.