(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.07.15 2015가단15037

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.07.15 2015가단15037

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The counterclaim claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Counterclaim Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On December 10, 2014, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Counterclaim Plaintiff was driven a D car owned by the Counterclaim Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant car”) on the road near Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant car”). On December 10, 2014, the occurrence of an accident that causes damage to the fronter, the lower part of the instant car was faced by the Counterclaim Defendant while performing road repair works, and damages for the future, the lower part of the instant car, the lower part of which was installed by the Counterclaim Defendant while doing so (hereinafter “instant accident”).

In the event of the instant accident, the counterclaim Defendant: (a) performed road repair work; (b) made the road around the top lids around the front lids at lower than the existing road; (c) left the road above the road and did not install any caution or warning sign; and (d) accordingly, the counterclaim Defendant is liable to compensate the counterclaim for the instant automobile repair cost of KRW 27,014,020 and the car sirens at KRW 49,450,50.

2. In full view of the results of the appraisal commission made by the Counterclaim on December 15, 2015, the fact-finding results, and the purport of the entire pleadings, it can be acknowledged that: (a) the part that the Lessee designated as the part damaged by the instant accident, which the Lessee designated as the part damaged by the front-hander of the instant vehicle; (b) approximately KRW 110cc of the lid lids set up by the Counterclaim Defendant, is larger than 69cc in diameter; and (c) other parts that the Lessee asserted as the part damaged by the instant accident, which the Lessee claimed as the part damaged by the damage caused by the instant accident, are difficult to be deemed to have occurred due to shock with the lids set up by

In light of the above facts, the evidence submitted by the Lessee alone is insufficient to acknowledge the existence of damages claimed by the Lessee due to the instant accident, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, the argument by the Lessee is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the counterclaim of this case by the Counterclaim Plaintiff is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2017.06.27 2016가단28237

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.03.31 2014가단63634

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.11.22 2016가단7912

-인천지방법원 2016.02.17 2015가단71633

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.06.11 2012가합539059