beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.07.08 2014가단522666

손해배상(자)

Text

1. The plaintiff against the defendant based on the insurance contract in the annexed Form 2 in relation to the traffic accident in the annexed Form 1.

Reasons

On October 18, 2013, at around 18:00, the insured vehicle A and B driving, the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle C, and the E-distance Intersection in Gwangju-gu (hereinafter “instant accident”), and due to the damage of the foregoing storming vehicle B, the fact that the vehicle was leased from the Defendant as a total amount of KRW 30 million for 30 days, which is the repair period of the said vehicle, does not conflict between the parties, or that the fact that the vehicle B was leased from the Defendant as a total amount of KRW 30 million, which is the repair period of the said vehicle, is recognized by the entries in the evidence No. 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings.

The defendant asserts that since the plaintiff guaranteed B's obligation to pay rent for the defendant, at least 21,731,310 won should be paid from the plaintiff. However, in relation to the accident of this case, the plaintiff is only liable for damages against B in accordance with Articles 3 and 10 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act and Article 724 (2) of the Commercial Act, and no legal claim or liability relationship exists with the defendant. However, if there exists a contractual relationship such as the payment guarantee with the plaintiff as the defendant's assertion, the defendant bears the obligation to the defendant in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. However, there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff guaranteed B's obligation to pay rent for the defendant as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, as long as the Plaintiff did not bear the obligation to pay the insurance money based on the insurance contract as shown in the attached Table 2 related to the instant accident, and the Defendant contests this and seeks the payment of rent, there is a benefit to seek confirmation.

As such, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted on the ground of the reasons.