beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.30 2018나39920

구상금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid operator who has entered into an automobile mutual aid contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 4, 2017, around 11:05, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven the four-lane of the monthly channel, the four-lane front D in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, into the commercial distance slope of the used vehicle, and discovered the vehicles illegally parked in the front section of the vehicle and changed the vehicle into the three-lane, there was an accident that conflicts between the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle and the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”). At the time of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the driver and the passenger F, G, H, and I (hereinafter “passenger”).

C. By November 23, 2017, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 4,226,920 for the medical expenses and future treatment expenses incurred by the instant accident of the Plaintiff’s driver and his/her passengers.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted by the parties is negligent in proceeding despite that the driver of the defendant vehicle was also at a situation that could sufficiently anticipate the change of the vehicle of the plaintiff vehicle, and the causal relationship between the accident of this case and the injury of the plaintiff vehicle driver and the passenger is recognized. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the treatment-related cost of KRW 4,226,90, out of the prepaid insurance proceeds.

In this regard, the Defendant did not turn on the direction, and did not look at the distance with the Defendant’s vehicle, and caused the Plaintiff’s previous negligence of the driver of the vehicle who attempted to change the lane in an unreasonable manner. Even if there was the negligence of the Defendant’s driver, the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driver, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle.