logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.07.07 2018나63787 (2)
구상금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff as a party is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with C, which contains a special agreement on indemnity by an uninsurance motor vehicle, with respect to his/her own motor vehicle (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

The designated person is the owner of the E vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”) and the mother of the Defendant, and the Defendant is the driver of the Defendant vehicle.

B. The Defendant, at around 21:00 on May 13, 2016, drink C and alcohol at the head house near the house of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, and the Defendant gets on and off the vehicle that he drives, and drinks alcohol by not later than 00:30 on May 14, 2016.

Afterward, the Defendant was driving the Defendant’s vehicle to take aboard C with C’s house at the head of C, and was negligent in failing to perform the safety driving duty on the front road of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G on May 14, 2016, and caused the protective walls installed front of the bus stops of the bus exclusive lanes due to the negligence of failing to perform the safety driving duty on the front road of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). At the time of the instant accident, C was locked by having the person under his command followed the person under his command.

On the other hand, C suffered injury to the left-hand knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife,

C. The Defendant’s vehicle that is paid insurance money is not mandatory insurance, and thus constitutes “non-insurance vehicle” under the instant insurance contract.

According to Article 18(1)2 of the terms and conditions of the insurance contract of this case, the insured or the parents and children of the insured or their spouses shall be the insured of a special contract for injury security by non-insured cars, and C shall be the insured of the insurance contract of this case as the registered insured of the insurance contract of this case.

The Plaintiff’s insurance money under the instant insurance contract to C with the insurance money under a special contract for the coverage of an insured motor vehicle under the instant insurance contract, which is the sum of August 11, 2016 and August 17, 2016, 5,073.

arrow