[손해배상(자)][공1991.6.15,(898),1465]
The case holding that the other party taxi driver's negligence is recognized in a traffic accident caused by Obababa flabbba flabbbba flabbbba, which was used on the first line in the opposite part.
The case holding that the other party taxi driver's negligence is recognized in a traffic accident caused by Obababa flabbba flabbbbbba, which was used on the first line in the opposite part beyond a bridged distance.
Article 750 of the Civil Act
[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Dong-young et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellee)
Park Gyeong-soo et al.
[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee
Seoul High Court Decision 90Na17608 delivered on November 8, 1990
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
(1) As to the first ground for appeal:
The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below is as follows. The traffic accident of this case is the traffic accident of this case, that is, if the non-party 1, a driver belonging to the defendant, driving a business taxi owned by the defendant around 02:0 on Aug. 8, 1989, and proceed with the first line of the three-lane roads north Do of Seongdong-gu, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, with the view to 40 km at a speed above 40 km and speed above 100 km, while driving the first line of this case at a speed above 100 km, it is difficult to find that the non-party 1, a driver of this case, was not at least the victim of this case on the back side, and it is hard to find that the non-party 1, a driver of this case, was at least 30 km away from the central road without any error of law by misunderstanding the rules of evidence concerning the operation of the above two-way line with the central road.
(2) As to ground of appeal No. 2
Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the judgment below in light of the records, the traffic accident in this case became a cause of negligence as stated in the above victim's judgment, and the degree of negligence is about 30 percent, and it cannot be said that there is an error of law that significantly misleads the comparative bridge at the degree of both parties' negligence, such as the theory of lawsuit, and therefore, the discussion cannot
(3) Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)