logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.06.26 2015나40361
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B automobiles owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a dump truck (hereinafter “Defendant”) with respect to Cump truck (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. At around 08:25, on March 7, 2014, D, the spouse of the Plaintiff, driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and proceeded along one lane of the fourth line road in front of the F Hospital located in Busan Shipping Daegu (hereinafter “instant road”). However, the driver of the Defendant vehicle, prior to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, who was driving along the two-lanes of the instant road, was on a sudden change in the course and turn to the left to the left in order to make a U-turn at the point where the U-turn line is newly created.

Accordingly, the plaintiff's vehicle has shocked on the left side of the defendant's vehicle in front of the right side.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

With respect to the instant accident, the Plaintiff paid 8,278,000 won in total to the repair business entity for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1, 5, and 6, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Article 19(3) of the Road Traffic Act provides that "the driver of any motor vehicle shall not change the course when it is likely to impede normal traffic of other motor vehicles running in the direction to change the course of the motor vehicle," and according to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that the driver of the motor vehicle of this case caused the accident of this case by the negligence of changing the course without properly verifying the fact even though the motor vehicle of this case was in the process of the first motor vehicle.

Therefore, the defendant, who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is liable for damages caused by the instant accident to A, the owner of the vehicle.

(b) Nos. 1, 2, and 7 of the limitation of liability A, A.

arrow