logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.05.11 2016가단502864
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On the roads in front of the Jeju-gun of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the road in front of the Jeju-gun of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant road”), there is a defect in which the protective fence, which was not equipped with the function of preventing the departure of the vehicle, was installed low, and as a result, C driving the instant vehicle for E-car (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) on September 12:35, 2015, while driving the instant road on September 12:35, 2015, while the instant vehicle was driving on the road, C died, the instant vehicle was facing the protective fence and fell beyond the protective fence, and C died.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). Therefore, as an insurer who concluded an insurance contract with respect to the instant vehicle, the Defendant is obligated to pay the amount of indemnity to the Plaintiff who paid the insurance money to F.

2. Determination

(a) Defect in the construction or management of public structures in accordance with Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act means a state in which the public structures have not been ordinarily safe in accordance with their intended use;

However, it cannot be said that there is a defect in the construction or management of a public structure merely because the public structure is not in a state of completeness and has any defect in its function. In light of the overall circumstances such as the purpose of use of the public structure and its current status and current status of use, it is necessary to determine whether the construction manager has fulfilled the duty to take protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the danger of the public structure.

On the other hand, if the criteria for safety stipulated in the statutes or the internal rules of the administrative agency exist, it can be a single standard for determining whether this is defective in the construction and management of public structures (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da23455, Nov. 9, 2006). We examine whether there is any defect as alleged by the Plaintiff.

(b) Installation of road safety facilities established by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport in accordance with the Regulations on Road Structures and Standards;

arrow