beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 43,309,584 and KRW 43,00,00 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 43,309,584 from January 23, 2015 and KRW 309,584.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Around 09:10 on December 25, 2014, Nonparty A, while getting Nonparty B on the back seat, driven a C 250C 250cc oba (hereinafter “Plaintiff-motor vehicle”), and at the time of Jinju, there was an accident that conflict between the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, where the traffic control is not performed in front of the E-mail located in D at Jinju City. Nonparty A, while driving the road at a speed of about 118 km per hour at a speed of about 30 km in speed from the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle at a speed of about 30 km in speed.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.
Due to the accident in this case, B died due to low-blood shock, dump in the mouth, etc.
C. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle.
The Plaintiff paid totaling KRW 43,095,840 on March 19, 2015 to the heir of B, as stated in the attached Form, for the amount of compensation for damages, KRW 430,00,000, and for the medical expenses, KRW 433,095,840 on January 23, 2015.
[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Evidence No. 1 to 9, and Evidence No. 2, Evidence No. 1-10, and the purport of the whole pleadings]
2. The parties' assertion
A. At the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the F, who driven the Defendant vehicle at the time of the instant accident, was negligent in not yield the course to the Plaintiff vehicle that was going on a wider place, and even if the Defendant vehicle driver was not obliged to yield the course to the Plaintiff vehicle because the width of the household road is the same, the Defendant vehicle driver was negligent in failing to exercise such duty of care, despite the fact that the Defendant vehicle driver is obliged to safely access to the intersection by checking the front and rear left and right of the vehicle when entering the intersection where no traffic signal is installed.