logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원충주지원 2016.11.30 2015가단4781
손해배상(자)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 92,343,193 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from September 15, 2013 to November 30, 2016.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. At around 18:20 on September 15, 2013, B, while driving a self-owned C Motor Vehicle and entering the road from the egri-ro back of the Egri-gun, Egri-gun, the Egri-gun, the Egri-gun, who was proceeding immediately from the said road, shocked the Plaintiff’s FOba.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered injury, such as light flachising, two flachising, light flachising, light flachising, flachis damage, echising and flachising the right side, flachising, echising, and echising echissis, and echiscopic echissis.

B. The Defendant is a company that concluded an automobile insurance contract for C automobiles with B.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, 8 through 11, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. In light of the occurrence of liability for damages, the above recognition, the circumstances surrounding the occurrence of the instant accident, and the situation at the scene of the occurrence of the accident, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the following facts: (a) at the time, B violated the duty of care to verify whether the vehicle traveling on the road before entering the road after moving the road from the farm road to the road; and (b) the instant accident occurred due to such negligence, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages caused by the instant accident as the insurer B.

However, in light of all the circumstances revealed in the purport of the entire pleadings, such as the fact that the plaintiff also seems to have neglected the duty of the front time, the location of the accident in this case, the location of the vehicle driving B, and the surrounding road conditions, it is reasonable to recognize the plaintiff's negligence as 30% and limit the defendant's responsibility to 70%.

B. Except as otherwise provided under the scope of liability for damages, the annexed sheet of liability for damages is as follows.

1. The income of the plaintiff by lost income shall be urban daily wage.

arrow