logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.08.16 2019나19572
구상금
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. The circumstances leading up to the instant accident are as follows.

At the time of the accident, the insured vehicle CD on October 4, 2018 at the time of the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff, who entered the said intersection at the time of the accident, left the right side part of the Defendant’s vehicle that had entered the said intersection while going to the left part on the left part at the direction of the direction of the direction of the road at the distance intersection at the above location of the location of the location of the Plaintiff, which was 1009,000 won and 50,000 won for the insured vehicle of the self-paid vehicle of the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff (based on the recognition), without any dispute, at the cost of repair of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, Gap’s 1 through 7 evidence, Eul’s 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s instant accident occurred due to the former negligence of the Defendant’s driver who attempted to turn back the Plaintiff’s vehicle without temporarily suspending the Plaintiff’s vehicle even though it was a red signal, and without confirming the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the Plaintiff the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle paid with the insurance money as the reimbursement.

B. Although the Plaintiff’s vehicle could have sufficiently discovered the Defendant’s vehicle with the right of left turn by entering the intersection where traffic is not controlled, the Plaintiff’s vehicle neglected to perform the right of call, and caused the Defendant’s vehicle to shock by violating and speeding duty, and the Defendant’s driver did not have any way to avoid the accident, and thus, the instant accident occurred due to the Plaintiff’s total negligence.

3. Determination

A. According to the whole evidence and arguments, the Plaintiff’s vehicle has a stop line immediately before the crosswalk in front of the intersection while entering the three-distance intersection where the instant accident occurred, which is the place where the instant accident occurred, and the yellow light signal was operated, but at a reduced speed.

arrow