logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2017.09.06 2016가단50217
보험금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 33,212,663 as well as 5% per annum from January 14, 2013 to September 6, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff is a B 15 tons truck around 07:50 on January 14, 2013 (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”).

) The driver driven the vehicle and was waiting for signal by stopping according to the stop signal while driving one lane of the Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana Bana na Bana na

2) The Plaintiff’s accident (hereinafter “instant accident”) involving (i) the escape certificate of a signboard, the fiber-ponion (No. 4-5) of a fiber-poned fiber, the escape certificate of a refinite-poned side (No. 5) of a refinite-poned side, and the escape certificate of a refinite-ponile-1,000) on the part of the Plaintiff, where the Plaintiff was found and operated the Plaintiff’

(2) The defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a comprehensive insurance contract for the defendant's vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for damages sustained by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.

On the other hand, the defendant alleged that the plaintiff neglected to undergo timely medical treatment on May 6, 2013 after the accident of this case, such as the plaintiff's mathy on the two legs on January 25, 2013, and caused the plaintiff's symptoms worse, and thus, the plaintiff's negligence should be taken into account. However, in light of the result of the inquiry reply to the head of Gangseowon University Hospital, it is difficult to deem that the plaintiff delayed medical treatment for a certain period of time, and therefore, the plaintiff's symptoms worsen. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is groundless.

2. The Plaintiff sustained an injury, such as the escape from a signboard, due to the instant accident, etc. up to now.

arrow