logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원군산지원 2017.08.08 2016가단56491
손해배상(자)
Text

1. Defendant Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance Co., Ltd.: (a) KRW 27,100,00 for Plaintiff A, and KRW 16,400,00 for Plaintiff B and C, respectively.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The network D(hereinafter referred to as “the network”) was a worker employed by the business entity of E’s F.

On February 27, 2016, the Deceased was on board the J-style Creicker (hereinafter “instant Creicker”) installed in the vicinity of the H ex-factory located in the G in the Jeonju-gun, Jeonju-gun, and performed the work of street trees batteries by getting on board the bar installed in the J-style Creick (hereinafter “instant Creick”).

L buses belonging to a limited liability company in South and North Korea operated by Nonparty K (hereinafter “instant bus”) are proceeding on a road on which off-booming operations were conducted, but K determined that the instant bus could pass through the instant boom booming booming around the said bus, thereby passing down the said bus booming down.

However, as the height of the bus of this case is higher than the height installed for the boom boom of this case, the air-conditioninger installed in the bus upper part of the bus of this case was faced with the boom boom of this case, and due to its shock, the Deceased who was on board the bus of this case was killed on the ground from the work stand.

(hereinafter “the instant accident”). The Plaintiff is the deceased’s spouse, and the Plaintiff B and C are the deceased’s children.

The National Federation of Bus Transport Business Associations (hereinafter “Defendant Federation”) is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with Honam-high speed limited company, the owner of the instant bus, and the Defendant Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Hyundai Sea”) is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with I who was driving the instant bus.

[Recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and Eul's evidence Nos. 3 and the purport of the entire argument, the deceased's summary of the plaintiff's claim is that the plaintiff died of a traffic accident caused by competition between the negligence of the driver and the negligence of the bus driver of this case, and thus, the plaintiff's Hyundai Sea and the bus insurer of this case, who is the insurer of the plaintiff.

arrow