logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.13 2016나84377
구상금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The following facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 2 and 3:

The plaintiff is a guarantee business operator entrusted by the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport with the business of guaranteeing motor vehicle accident compensation prescribed in Article 30 (1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation") pursuant to Article 45 (1) of the same Act, and the defendant is the owner of B vehicles (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant

B. At around 16:50 on December 17, 2014, the Defendant driven the Defendant’s vehicle, which was not covered by the liability insurance, and proceeded with D without permission passing the private-distance crossing from the left side of the running direction of the Defendant’s vehicle to the right side while driving the road of the way C in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from the front side of the waterside to the road of the Gu mountain.

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

The Plaintiff received a claim for payment of compensation for damage on the ground that the Defendant vehicle is an non-insurance vehicle, and paid KRW 4,610,690 in total to D until November 11, 2015, as an insurer entrusted with the duties of the Government regarding the motor vehicle accident compensation guarantee business in accordance with the Automobile Loss Compensation Act.

2. Determination

A. According to the above fact of recognition of the liability for damages, the defendant is liable to compensate D for damages caused by the instant accident as a driver of a sea-going vehicle, and the plaintiff paid KRW 4,610,690 in total to D as compensation for the automobile accident compensation business. Accordingly, the plaintiff can exercise the right to claim damages against D against the defendant within the extent of the amount paid by the plaintiff.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings prior to the limitation of liability, namely, the location of the instant accident is a intersection where a one-lane road crossings, and where signal lights are installed in the vicinity, D is installed.

arrow