손해배상(자)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.
1. The Plaintiff is a person who, on May 5, 2017, rents B vehicles owned by the said company (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff vehicles”) from Ethren Garenk Co., Ltd., and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity which entered into a mutual aid agreement on C vehicles (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicles”).
At around 10:50 on May 12, 2017, the defendant vehicle left straight along the two lanes near ThaiIC, and turned down the plaintiff vehicle of the plaintiff driver, who was directly located on the right side of the road, before reaching a point where a change of lanes is possible, in order to enter the road into the zone of the route of the entrance into the zone of the zone of the zone of the road before the entry into the zone of the zone of the road (the direction of the vehicle driving is the real line on the direction of the vehicle driving, and the direction of the vehicle driving of the plaintiff is the moving line on the direction of the vehicle driving).
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident.” The Plaintiff leased and used another vehicle from the New Master Crafts Co., Ltd. during the repair period of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the total cost incurred therefrom is KRW 1,650,000.
[Grounds for recognition] In light of the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 through 8 (including paper numbers), and the facts above-mentioned foundation that recognized the purport of the whole pleadings, the accident of this case is attributable to the operation of defendant vehicle. Thus, the defendant, who is the mutual aid business operator of defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the accident of this case.
According to the above facts of limitation of liability, the accident of this case seems to have occurred due to the main negligence of changing the lane without properly checking whether the driver of the defendant vehicle has a vehicle for the plaintiff in the real line where the change of the lane is prohibited.
However, in full view of all the circumstances, such as the background of the accident revealed by the foregoing facts and the evidence mentioned above, and the structure of the access road and the joint section, the driver of the Plaintiff, who was directly engaged in the access road at the time, is also the driver of the vehicle.