(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.13 2014나66696

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.13 2014나66696

구상금

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. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with the Plaintiff on the B-owned vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid contractor who entered into a mutual aid contract with the Defendant on the C-owned vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On December 3, 2013, around 07:05, the driver of the Defendant vehicle: (a) driven the Defendant vehicle at a private distance intersection located in Ansan-gu, Ansan-si; (b) in order to detect the Plaintiff vehicle at a non-protective seat line at the right side in order to avoid collision; and (c) changed the lane to the right side of the road; and (d) caused injury to the Defendant vehicle by D, E, F, G, and H, which were on board the Defendant vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). C.

By February 2, 2014, the Plaintiff paid the victim D, E, F, G, and H a total of KRW 1,026,140 as insurance money for the medical expenses incurred from the instant accident, and for the agreed amount.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including each number if a separate number is attached) or video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The accident of this case is caused by competition between the negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle and the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle who violated the duty of the front line without being bound even after discovering the plaintiff's vehicle that is in need of the front line according to the straight line. It is reasonable to view that the negligence ratio related to the occurrence of the accident of this case against the driver of the defendant vehicle is 40%. Therefore, the plaintiff has the right to claim compensation for money equivalent to the above fault ratio of the driver of the vehicle of this case among the insurance money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, and damages for delay. 2) The accident of this case of this case by the defendant vehicle entered the intersection according to the straight line, but the plaintiff's vehicle

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.18 2020나35730

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.06 2014나63017

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.29 2017나47252

-울산지방법원 2018.06.20 2017나2854

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.11 2015나17172