beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.06.21 2016가단234092

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,023,260 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from August 4, 2014 to June 21, 2018.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a company operating air transport business, and the Plaintiff (C) is a passenger who was on board the Defendant’s D Aircraft (hereinafter “instant aircraft”) located in the New York JFK Airport from the place of departure on August 3, 2014, the New York JFK Airport of the Republic of Korea, and the place of destination of the Defendant, Seoul Incheon Airport.

B. On August 4, 2014, the Defendant’s crew provided a heavy difference to the Plaintiff after approximately six hours of takeoff of the instant aircraft, and the Defendant’s crew stored a tea boom with hot water in his/her dispute, and after the Plaintiff got it into his/her contact bucks, the Plaintiff caused an accident in which water was accumulated into the Plaintiff’s He/she’s bucks (hereinafter “instant accident”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered pictures from the Plaintiff’s left-hand bucks.

C. From August 5, 2014 to October 10 of the same year, the Plaintiff spent medical expenses of KRW 742,040 and 66,000 for the treatment of the said images and reflectors in the first medical department and the visual department from August 5, 2014 to October 10 of the same year.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries or videos, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Defendant is liable for compensating the Plaintiff for damages caused by the instant accident in accordance with Articles 17(1) and 21 of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage for Air (hereinafter “ Montreal Convention”).

B. The Defendant’s instant accident was caused after being placed on his/her tea table from his/her crew members, and was not caused by external factors, and thus, does not constitute “accident” as stipulated in Article 17(1) of the Montreal Convention, and thus, the Defendant is not liable to compensate for the Plaintiff’s damage. Even if it falls under a domestic affairs, the instant accident was wholly caused by the Plaintiff’s mistake.