logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.08.21 2019나64947
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of each entry or image of Gap evidence 1 to 11, 13, and Eul evidence 1 to 5 (including the branch numbers if there are several numbers) without dispute between the parties, or the whole purport of the pleadings.

The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with C Co., Ltd. with respect to D Trucks (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”).

The defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the F-E-E-E-E-Wed Vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant vehicle").

B. At around 14:20 on November 22, 2016, G: (a) while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle in parallel with the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes from the 4th parallel of Pyeongtaek-si passenger terminal room at Pyeongtaek-si to the 5-lane passenger terminal room at Pyeongtaek-si (hereinafter “instant intersection”); (b) while driving the said intersection by E and driving the said intersection along the U.S. at the U. S. S. road at the parallel of the five-lane two-lanes of the two-lanes of the front line of the Defendant’s vehicle, the side side of the Defendant’s front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant intersection”).

(hereinafter “instant accident”). At the time of the instant accident, the instant intersection had a yellow flash signal, etc. installed, and traffic control was not performed.

Due to the accident in this case, H suffered serious injury, such as an external cerebral cerebral typosis, etc. by the Dong winner of the Defendant vehicle.

C. On April 28, 2017, at the Seongbuk-gu Police Station, the traffic accident confirmation agent drafted on April 28, 2017 stated the cause of the accident as “violation of the concession driving at an intersection” and stated the details of the accident as “an accident in which the Plaintiff’s vehicle enters the intersection by negligence and by negligence violating the concession driving duty at the intersection and the Defendant’s vehicle is in conflict.”

On the other hand, both the Plaintiff and the Defendant present the case below the “mutual agreement on the deliberation of car insurance disputes.”

arrow