beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 211,338,960 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from March 18, 2015 to May 2, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff, who is a business operator entrusted with the business of guaranteeing motor vehicle accident compensation of the government that compensates for damage suffered by the victim within the limit of liability insurance, concluded the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with the insured as B with respect to his/her owned motor vehicle, and included the “free injury” special agreement. According to the above special agreement, the insured is obliged to pay the insurance money as stipulated in the terms and conditions in the event the insured suffers an injury by an accident by
B. On May 9, 2014, at around 22:05, the Defendant: (a) driven a cTT 100 Obane (hereinafter “the instant Obane”); (b) neglected to perform the duty of Jeonju City while driving a local road of 60 U.S. Y. Y. Y. Y. Y. Y. Y. Y. Y. 20 to 25 km from the ebbbbbbbs of Abs. Y. Y; (c) neglected to go beyond the road by shocking the victim B (hereinafter “victim”) who walked the said road from the ebs.g., the front headlight and front wheels part of Obs. Y in the instant case.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.
The injured party suffered injuries, such as blood transfusions, dys (cerebral dys), and sacrine sacrine sacrines under external sacrines without an open address, due to the instant accident. D.
On July 2014, the victim filed a claim with the Plaintiff for the payment of insurance proceeds, and on March 17, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 101,935,720 (=101,703,240, total amount of KRW 109,935,720 and KRW 109,638,960 (=101,703, 240, KRW 109,935,720) according to the terms and conditions of the non-insurance and the government guarantee business.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8, Gap evidence 13, 14, and 15 (including each number in case of additional evidence) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant is liable for damages to the victim as a tortfeasor who drives the Oral Ba of this case.