logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.10 2017가단5168993
구상금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly committed against the Plaintiff KRW 61,118,693 and Defendant D from February 6, 2016 to December 23, 2017.

Reasons

1. On June 10, 2015, around 21:50 on the premise that there was no dispute, the instant fire accident occurred between the “I” factory building located in the nearby area and the houseing of the H, due to the fire that was emitted from the lower part of the left side of the sitch type-type type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-of-

Until February 5, 2016, the Plaintiff, as an insurer, paid insurance proceeds of KRW 61,118,693, including KRW 20,046,045, and KRW 11,072,648, and KRW 30,00,00,00 for movable property damage, to the owner of the instant building and lessee of the “I” building and H, respectively.

Defendant E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant E”) is an insurer who entered into an insurance contract with Defendant D to cover the loss in the event that Defendant D is liable for damages due to a fire that occurred from the factory as the subject matter of the examination by taking the factory into consideration with Defendant D as the subject matter of the examination.

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, Defendant D is the possessor and manager of the place where the instant fire accident occurred, and Defendant E is the insurer who entered into an insurance contract with Defendant D, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants jointly and severally are liable to pay KRW 61,118,693 to the Plaintiff who acquired the right of indemnity in subrogation upon the payment of the insurance amount.

Although Defendant E asserts that since an insurance contract entered into with Defendant D is invalid as a double insurance contract caused by fraud, or the instant fire accident occurred due to Defendant D’s fire, Defendant E is exempted from liability. However, even if it is based on all proof of Defendant E, it is insufficient to recognize the assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. If so, the Defendants jointly pay KRW 61,118,693 to the Plaintiff, and Defendant D, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint filed by the Plaintiff, from February 6, 2016 to December 23, 2017; Defendant E, from November 14, 2017, 5% per annum under the Civil Act until November 14, 2017; and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the day of full payment.

arrow