beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.12 2018가단5164752

구상금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 65,180,00 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from March 26, 2018 to July 12, 2019.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an insurance contract with C’s D Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s Motor Vehicle”).

B. Around January 8, 2018, at around 00:45, when driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle, C conflicts with the Defendant’s E-motor vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”) driving the Defendant’s vehicle driving in the front direction, driving one lane in the front direction of the city in Seoul along the one lane among the five lanes in Busan.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On March 26, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 101,530,00 to C with the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident, and received KRW 6.35 million with the remainder return, and KRW 20,000 from the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 14 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The instant accident alleged by the Plaintiff occurred due to the Defendant’s full negligence on the part of the Defendant driving on an expressway, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff with the indemnity amount less the remaining value of the insurance proceeds paid to C and the liability insurance proceeds received from the Defendant vehicle insurer.

B. At the time of the instant accident asserted by the Defendant, the Defendant’s negligence excessive to C beyond the speed limit should be considered, and the amount of damages should also be calculated excessively, and the amount paid by the Defendant to C should also be deducted.

3. Determination

A. In general, a motor vehicle driver who operates a road with a median line installed along his/her own bus line is trusting the operation of a marina line in compliance with it. Thus, barring any special circumstance that could anticipate the abnormal operation of the other motor vehicle, the other motor vehicle driver is not obliged to perform his/her duty of care to expect the other motor vehicle to run even when the latter motor vehicle intrudes into the median line, and in this case, the above motor vehicle driver exceeds the speed limit.