beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2019.12.17 2019가단31593

손해배상(자)

Text

1. Defendant B: (a) 5% per annum from January 10, 2019 to December 17, 2019; and (b) December 18, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 12, 2018, Defendant B around 12:40, Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant C”) operated an E Pump truck (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction machinery”) from the aggregate surface of the Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant C”) and loaded Fump truck (hereinafter referred to as “instant truck”) operated by the Plaintiff, Defendant B caused an accident that shocks the left part of the said dump truck with the part of the Pump truck (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

B. The instant construction machinery is owned by Defendant C, and the instant truck is registered in the name of G (mutual H). The Plaintiff and G have married on December 30, 198, and they were divorced on April 7, 2003.

C. In the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered from injury, such as bones, shouldering, and tensions, and received hospitalized treatment at IE from November 13, 2018 to November 27, 2018. The instant truck was stored in J Co., Ltd. for repair on November 12, 2018 due to the destruction of loaded parts, but was received from November 10, 2018 to January 9, 2019 due to delay in the decision to process the insurance.

[Reasons for Recognition: The entry of Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 4-1, 2, and 7-1, and evidence No. 4-3, 4, and 5, as a whole, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments of Gap]

2. Whether liability for damages arises;

A. As recognized in paragraph 1-A against Defendant B, Defendant B’s erroneous operation of Pester Sheet and caused the instant accident constitutes a tort due to negligence and thus, Defendant B is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred due to the instant accident.

(Article 750 of the Civil Act). (b)

As Defendant C is liable for the direction and supervision of Defendant C as an employer, the Plaintiff asserted that he is liable for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the instant accident as a joint tortfeasor. As such, the fact that the instant construction machinery was owned by Defendant C is the same as recognized in Article 1-2 (b).

B.B.

참조조문