beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.03.11 2019나59525

구상금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

At the time of the accident, at around 13:40 on February 12, 2019 at the time of the accident, the insurance-related part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle C Truck D truck was missing from the right edge road of the road accident situation in front of the building in Busan Northern-gu, and the part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which was changed into one lane, is 12,765,490 won (i.e., the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle - KRW 13,265,490 - Self-paid vehicle - KRW 500,000) on May 21, 2019, the fact that the accident of this case on May 21, 2019 (based on recognition), there is no dispute over the particulars of the accident of this case, Gap’s 1-7 evidence, and Eul’s certificate 1-9.

2. In light of the following circumstances, the instant accident was caused by the common negligence of the driver of the original Defendant’s vehicle, and the negligence ratio is reasonable to regard the Plaintiff’s vehicle as 70% and the Defendant’s vehicle as 30%.

① The Plaintiff’s vehicle is going away from the right lane and entered the fourth lane, and the accident in this case occurred rapidly (in light of the shocking part of the two vehicles, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s vehicle gets involved in the Plaintiff’s vehicle even after the Plaintiff’s change to the first lane is completed as the Plaintiff’s assertion). The main fault in the instant accident lies in the Plaintiff’s driver.

② However, inasmuch as there was no particular obstacle at the time and there was no particular obstacle, the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle, even though he was able to sufficiently recognize that the Plaintiff’s vehicle prior to the right lane was trying to change the lane into one lane, was negligent in neglecting the front line. Also, the occurrence of the instant accident or the expansion of damage, and therefore, the instant accident was at least 30% by negligence.

3. Conclusion: (i) the Defendant: (ii) the amount of indemnity to the Plaintiff KRW 3,479,647 (=3,979,647 (=total amount of damages 13,265,490 x 30% of the negligence ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle x 30%) and the Defendant from May 3, 2019, following the payment date of insurance money.