beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.03.25 2015나37312

구상금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with A and B Lone Star Vehicles (hereinafter “instant vehicle”), and the Defendant is a local government that installs and maintains street lamps in the Gyeonggi-si.

B. On October 19, 2014, around October 20, 2014, A parked the instant vehicle on the roads located in the Gyeonggi-gun Bank Carryover, which is one’s residence, and returned home. On October 8, 2014, around 01:33, a fire was presumed to have been caused by the sloping light from the street lamps installed on the part of the instant vehicle (hereinafter “instant street lamps”), and the fire was destroyed by the instant vehicle located far from the front line of the instant vehicle.

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

From July 7, 2014 to the 15th day of the same month, the Defendant requested the Korea Electrical Safety Corporation to conduct a regular precise safety inspection of 1,832 street lamps, including the instant street lamps, and 142 street lamps from among 15,356 street lamps in Yangju-gun. The Defendant was judged appropriate for the instant street lamps, but it was judged inappropriate for other 25 street lamps and eight control.

In addition, the defendant operated a team comprised of two persons (two drivers, two others) at ordinary times, and has received a report on the failure of residents. From July 16, 2014 to October 7, 2014, the defendant received a report on the failure of 112 street lamps from July 16, 2014, which is the date of the instant accident, and performed the relevant repair work.

On the other hand, around November 6, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,640,000 insurance money to A for damage caused by fire of the instant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including additional numbers), Eul evidence 3 and video, Gap witness A's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. We examine the determination of the cause of the claim, and there was a special external appearance on the street of this case.