beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.04.27 2017나57522

손해배상(자)

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The part concerning the claim for the confirmation of the existence of an obligation in the principal lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

3. This.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to Echip car (hereinafter “accident car”), and the Defendant is the owner of the Cchip in Nam-gu Seoul metropolitan area B.

B. D, around 18:00 on June 17, 2016, while driving an accident vehicle in front of the said CSS, the first collision with the FF taxi vehicle, and then pushed the cab vehicle beside the cab by the string of the vehicle involved in the accident while pushing ahead of the string of the vehicle involved in the accident by the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the vehicle at the CSS (the basis for concrete on the side below the string of the string of the string station) and the

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 6,587,00 to the Defendant on September 8, 2016 as damages for the instant accident. D.

The repair cost of a Ireland and a groud in the instant accident is KRW 392,318 (excluding value-added tax), and the repair cost of a broud in the KTcomle that was destroyed by the instant accident is KRW 300,000 (excluding value-added tax).

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 5, Eul evidence 1 and 6 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

(2) As a result of the appraiser H’s appraisal, the purport of the entire pleading

2. The Plaintiff’s determination as to the legitimacy of the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for the confirmation of the existence of an obligation among the principal lawsuit, asserts that the Plaintiff’s liability for damages against the Defendant due to the instant accident does not exceed KRW 692,318, and seeks its confirmation.

Ex officio, it is recognized that the plaintiff's legal status is the most effective and appropriate means to get a judgment in order to eliminate such apprehensions and risks when the plaintiff's legal status is unstable and dangerous. However, in addition to the confirmation of existence of the above obligation, the plaintiff's compensation liability against the defendant should not be exceeded 692,318 won, which is the remainder of 5,894,682 won after deducting the above 692,318 won from the damages paid by the plaintiff, under the premise that the damages liability against the defendant was not exceeded 692,318 won.