logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.12.13 2018나56302
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

1...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On September 1, 2016, around 10:50 on September 1, 2016, the Defendant’s front corner part of the Defendant’s vehicle that entered the road into the main road in the construction section outside the street near the intersection of the Hahwon-gun, Hahwon-gun (hereinafter “instant accident”) led to an accident that shocks the rear wheels part on the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that directly carried the main road into the main road (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On October 13, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,176,00,000, after deducting the insured’s self-paid share amounting to KRW 294,000 (=1,470,000 x 20%) from the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to C as the insured on October 13, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is an accident that occurred during the course of the Defendant’s entry into the main road while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle in order to overtake the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and is caused by the Defendant’s unilateral negligence. Therefore, the Defendant, the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the insurance money paid to the Plaintiff with the indemnity amount of KRW 1,176,00, and damages for delay.

3. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence as seen earlier, the driver of the Defendant vehicle, as well as the Defendant vehicle, are negligent by entering a speed to drive the vehicle in order to drive the vehicle, even though the driver was obligated to reduce speed while entering the vehicle on the road and drive the vehicle on the road. The road in which the instant accident occurred without signal apparatus, and thus, the Plaintiff vehicle as well as the Plaintiff vehicle are also around.

arrow