(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.08.14 2020나307

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.08.14 2020나307

손해배상(자)

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following order of payment shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) E is the F Vehicle around 08:56 October 19, 2018 (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

2) The Defendant’s Bracked the Defendant’s Bracked the Defendant’s Brack-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-kick-k

(2) H (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on the same day due to the instant accident.

3) The plaintiffs are the children of the deceased, and the defendant is the insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to the defendant's vehicle. The ground for recognition is the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Gap evidence No. 7, Eul evidence No. 1 (each of the descriptions, images, and arguments included in the number).

B. According to the above recognition of liability, since the deceased died due to the operation of the defendant vehicle, the defendant is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the accident of this case as an insurer of the defendant vehicle unless there are special circumstances.

C. The limitation of liability, however, even though the location of the instant accident occurred frequently, there was no difference between the vehicular road and India in height, and only a white solid line was kept. In particular, since the road where the deceased was lying on the wall and the space where they could be avoided was insufficient, the deceased should have been able to use the opposite side of the road where the Nama is in the space where the Nama is in place and to confirm the passage of the vehicle. However, such measures were insufficient even if they were to have been promoted by such methods as using the opposite side of the road where the Nama is in place and confirming the passage of the vehicle.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2015.11.17 2014가단59381

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.08.30 2017가단106440

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.30 2016가단5198980

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.29 2019가단5072768

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.12.06 2016가단5104602