logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.08.28 2019나78144
손해배상(자) 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

Reasons

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is deemed to be legitimate even if this court did not appear in all the arguments in the court of first instance.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is that the second 20th 20th 20 of the judgment of the court of first instance is “the injury of the No. 10th 3rd 20 is the injury of the No. 3rd 9 of the judgment of the court of first instance,” and the part of the “limit on liability” of the first 3rd 9th 1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 20 is the same as the reasons of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the part of the “limit on

[Supplementary Use]

C. According to the above basic facts and the evidence revealed earlier, in the case of the instant accident, the principal negligence of the Defendant vehicle entering the intersection is recognized in violation of the signal of the intersection while the signal of the intersection is red. However, in the event that the vehicle was changed to the yellow light before entering the intersection, the vehicle should stop “stop” or “immediately before the intersection” (attached Table 2 of Article 6(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act), and (2) the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not stop without stopping the intersection, even though it was aware that the signal of the intersection was changed to yellow, before entering the intersection of the instant accident place, and without stopping the intersection (see Supreme Court Decision 2018Do14262, Dec. 27, 2018). (3) At the time, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was missing from the underground road prior to the intersection or was in operation of the vehicle, and it is difficult to grasp the situation of the cross-section in preparation for the traffic signal of the Plaintiff’s right side prior to the intersection.

arrow