(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.20 2015나11365

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 2015.11.20 2015나11365

손해배상(자)

Text

1. Of the part against A of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 162,630,858 against the defendant and KRW 102,630 among them.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) The defendant is F vehicle (hereinafter referred to as defendant vehicle)

(2) On October 26, 201, while under the influence of 0.091% of alcohol content, E driving the Defendant’s vehicle under the influence of alcohol around 16:5 on October 26, 2011, and driving the vehicle on the backside of the Defendant vehicle, and driving the vehicle on the middle-lane of the point of the Orari-ri Yan-ri-ri Yan-ri-ri Yan-ri-si, the middle-lane of the Orari-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-do, and neglecting the safety driving obligation to drive the vehicle on the backside by negligence, the Defendant vehicle fell on the right side of the road to the construction site adjacent to the road

(hereinafter referred to as the "accident". 3) The plaintiff B is the spouse of the plaintiff. [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 11 (as to the attachment of a provisional number, each entry, including each number, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiffs for damages caused by the accident of this case as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.

C. Regarding the limitation of liability, the Defendant asserts that: (a) E driven the Defendant’s vehicle while under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant accident; (b) E renders drinking prior to the instant accident as Plaintiff A; (c) the Plaintiff failed to perform the duty of safe driving promotion that prevents the Plaintiff from driving under the influence of alcohol; and (b) the Plaintiff failed to wear the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident; and (c) the Plaintiff’s mistake contributed to the occurrence and expansion of the damage caused by the instant accident, and thus, the Defendant’s liability for damages should be limited.

First, whether the plaintiff was erroneous in the duty of safe driving promotion, the health team, E.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.23 2012가단173209

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.04.02 2018나64926

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.09.26 2013가단276266

-대구지방법원 상주지원 2018.12.12 2018가단6432

-대구지방법원포항지원 2016.04.05 2015가단975