beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.01.28 2020나44840

구상금

Text

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The purport and purport of the appeal

1. The purport of the claim;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to D Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

B. On March 20, 2019, around 06:35, the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered 109, in a straight distance without signal apparatus at 109, the Chyeong-si, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do. At the time, the Defendant’s vehicle entering the road crossings with the Plaintiff’s running road, and immediately discovered the Plaintiff’s vehicle that first entered, and shocked the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the Defendant (hereinafter “accident”). At the time, the running road of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was one-lane, and the running road of the Defendant’s vehicle was driven at the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the Defendant’s vehicle was driven at the speed exceeding 17 km per hour.

(c)

On April 2, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 8,140,000 after deducting KRW 500,000 for the Plaintiff’s automobile repair cost in accordance with the above insurance contract.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the accident of this case was caused by a grave negligence, which led to the plaintiff's first approach from the right side of the right side where the right of passage was exercised while the defendant's vehicle was not driven through the signal apparatus at the intersection without the signal apparatus and driving more than the fixed speed.

The decision is judged.

However, in the event that the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered an intersection without signal apparatus, it was negligent in neglecting it even if there was another vehicle travelling at the intersection, and in light of the situation of the instant accident, the road situation at the place where the accident occurred, the degree of damage of each vehicle, etc., the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s negligence.