beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.11.26 2015가단30653

구상금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with the owner of the A Emat Vehicle (hereinafter “instant vehicle”). The Defendant is a corporation established by the Korea Highway Corporation in order to build and manage the road and to conduct related business.

B around 00:08 on June 15, 2014, B operated the instant vehicle on the second quarter of the air conditioners of the Southern Sea Expressway at the end of the air conditioners of the second line, and passed the road bend to the right, and the right-hand side of the road was shocked by the first shock of the protective wall on the right-hand side of the road, and the second shock of the protective wall installed on the section where the protective wall was cut off, resulting in an accident leading to the third shock of the corner of the protective wall.

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

The driver B, the passenger C, and D were injured by this accident, and the passenger E died.

On October 16, 2015, the Plaintiff, as an insurer for the instant vehicle, paid the insurance proceeds of KRW 210,00,000 to E’s bereaved family members, KRW 65,274,680 to C, KRW 19,012,490 to D, and KRW 665,350 to B, KRW 294,952,52,520.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, 11 (including those with additional numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion occurred due to operational negligence, but the defect in the installation and management of the Defendant’s protective wall, namely, the defect in the installation and management of the Defendant’s protective wall, and the installation of the protective wall without continuously installing the protective fence at the location of the accident, and the fact that the mother has protruding out without installing the shock absorbing facility at the part of the protective fence, and as such, the occurrence of serious accidents and expansion of damage, the Defendant is obliged to claim compensation corresponding

B. (1) The defects in the construction and preservation of structures or public structures are the safety of structures or public structures, which shall normally be secured in accordance with their purposes.