구상금
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following amount shall be cancelled:
1. On July 27, 2009, Defendant A (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant A”) of the first instance court, on around 08:00, 200, driven the bnd underground floor B of Mapo-gu, where the Defendant and the Plaintiff entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “instant bnder”) and carried out an injury, such as cutting down the c’s bridge, which was in the bndal course, in order to make the access road pursuant to a radio instruction given by C, while driving the bnder on the 2nd underground floor B of Mapo-gu, where the Defendant and the Defendant were entering into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the Defendant, and was getting off the bnder in order to make the access road pursuant to a radio instruction given by C.
(hereinafter) By November 29, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 78,150,290 of temporary layoff benefits, disability benefits 79,841,671 of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and medical care benefits 101,58,730 of the total amount of KRW 259,58,691 under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act) to C.
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff filed a claim for reimbursement regarding the instant accident, and the Defendant paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff on June 12, 2012.
[Reasons for Recognition] A’s 1-2, A’s 2-2, A’s 4-1, 2-2, A’s 5-2, and 5-3’s , part of A’s 5-1, A’s 5-1, A’s 5-1, witness A’s , witness A’s 3-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Liability for damages and occurrence of the right of indemnity;
A. Comprehensively taking account of the above facts acknowledged as above, A had caused the instant accident by neglecting his duty of care to prevent the instant accident by thoroughly examining and operating whether or not there is a person around the instant excavation season at the time of the instant excavation season work. However, the Defendant is liable to compensate C for the damage caused by the instant accident, which is the insurer of the instant excavation season, which is a sea shield.
나. 구상권의 발생 ⑴ 당사자 주장 ㈎ 원고의 주장 이 사건 사고가 A의 과실로 발생하였고, A은 산재법 제87조 제1항의 ‘제3자’에 해당하므로, 위 굴삭기의 보험자인 피고는 위 보험급여액의 한도...