채무부존재확인
1. Between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff), and between D and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) on March 26, 2015 in Gwangju-si, Gwangju-dong.
A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The plaintiff is "motor vehicle on the part of the plaintiff et al." in D and E
A The insurance period of insurance is set from August 5, 2014 to August 5, 2015, and the defendant is called F vehicle and the defendant is called F vehicle.
is a driver of the State.
B. At around 18:02 on March 26, 2015, D conflict with the Defendant’s side, which was sent back from the long distance near the Cdong G High School to enter the alley, and left left from the right side.
The above accident is referred to as the "accident of this case".
(C) As a result, the Defendant suffered from injury, such as the escape of the humcon base, the humcon base, and the conical signboards. From May 12, 2015 to May 3, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,703,060 to the Defendant’s medical expenses, including H diagnosis radiation specialists and I, respectively.
2. Establishment of the Plaintiff’s liability for damages
A. According to the facts of recognition of liability, the Plaintiff is liable for damages suffered by the Defendant as an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff’s automobile.
B. In full view of the following circumstances, which are acknowledged as adding to the purport of the argument as a whole, the point at which the instant accident occurred, namely, the point at which the width was narrow as the entrance part of the Tut-type intersection, and the circumstances leading up to the accident, etc., it is reasonable to view that the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle on the part of the Plaintiff’s and the Defendant’s side is 60% to 40%.
Although the Plaintiff asserted that there was an agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant on the content that set the negligence ratio of 50% to 50%, it is insufficient to acknowledge the above assertion solely with the partial statement of evidence No. 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
3. It shall be in addition to the matters stated separately below the scope of the liability for damages.