logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.17 2019나9063
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

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with C Large Tracers (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with D Passenger Vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicles”).

B. On April 29, 2018, at around 21:50, the Plaintiff’s vehicle went into the right side of the Defendant vehicle to overtake the Plaintiff vehicle from the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle and the front part of the Defendant vehicle’s driver’s seat in front of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”). On April 29, 2018, the Plaintiff’s vehicle turned into the front side of the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle and the front part of the Defendant vehicle’s driver’s seat to the front side of the instant accident while entering the front side of the instant accident.

C. On October 29, 2018, the Defendant paid 13,884,880 won at the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle, and then filed an application for deliberation and mediation with the Plaintiff. On October 29, 2018, the Deliberation Committee decided on the charge ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle to 60:40 on the ground that the instant accident conflicts with the Defendant’s vehicle, which was directly engaged in a career change after the right transfer of the vehicle by the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s vehicle is unclear as to the cause of the traffic accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle appears to have become somewhat unreasonable entry, the process of the collision, and the collision.

Accordingly, on November 12, 2018, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant KRW 8,330,928 equivalent to 60% of the above KRW 13,884,880 paid by the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on December 5, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant accident is prior to the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s previous two-lanes of body, and it is unreasonable for the Defendant’s vehicle to complete almost two-lanes of course changes.

arrow