beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.17 2016가단5195066

손해배상(자)

Text

1. As to the Plaintiff A’s KRW 149,705,186, Plaintiff B’s KRW 2,00,000, and each of the said money from December 22, 2014.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) C are D Village Bus around December 22, 2014 (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”) around 17:25, 2014.

) A driving a vehicle and driving a two-lane road of the two-lanes of the intersection in front of the post office, 222, U.S., Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, in the direction of the road, along the two-lanes of the city-speed shooting distance from the front of the road, and the Plaintiff Company A, who followed the crosswalk to the left-hand side of the crosswalk in accordance with the motor vehicle’s personal safety and pedestrian protection duty, was negligent in failing to comply with the duty to protect the safety and pedestrian, moving the crosswalk to the left-hand side of the crosswalk in accordance with the motor vehicle’s personal safety, due to the negligence of failing to comply with the duty to protect the safety and pedestrian, has the Plaintiff exceeded A’s floor. C due to the negligence in the above duties, due to the Plaintiff’s blood and other injury caused to the Plaintiff Company A

(2) Plaintiff B is the Plaintiff’s child, and the Defendant is the mutual aid business operator who entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-5, 8 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above recognition of liability, the defendant is liable to compensate the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case as a mutual aid business operator of defendant vehicle.

C. The Defendant’s limitation of liability asserts that the Plaintiff A was negligent by deeming that the crosswalk signal was replaced to a pedestrian signal only, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion, and there is no reason to recognize the liability for the Plaintiff A who crossinged the crosswalk according to the pedestrian signal, etc. (the Defendant’s liability is 100%). 2. In addition to what is separately provided under the scope of liability for damages, it is identical to each corresponding item of the attached Form of the damages calculation sheet, and in principle, the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded.

The amount of damages at the time of the accident shall be calculated by deducting the interim interest at the rate of 5/12 per month.