beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
The court's explanation of this case by the court of the first instance as to this case is consistent with the reasoning of the first instance judgment except for the dismissal of part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment as follows and the new conclusion part is used. Thus, it is citing it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
(1) Part III through IX of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be amended as follows.
In light of the above-mentioned facts, the above traffic accident occurred when the driver of the defendant vehicle I neglected the duty of safe driving, such as the ebbbrence and the one-way traffic route, and the negligence of the plaintiff A, who entered the intersection, did not go through the intersection.
【The negligence on the part of the victim’s side is also considered as the negligence on the part of the victim’s side. In full view of all the circumstances such as the negligence on the part of the driver of the defendant vehicle (the negligence on the duty of care in the front line) and the negligence on the part of the plaintiff A (the passage through the road), and the negligence on the part of the deceased (the failure of safety mother, the negligence on the part of the husband) in accordance with the above legal principles, it is reasonable to deem that the negligence on the part of the victim’s side to exceed 80%. Thus, the liability for damages of the driver of the defendant vehicle is limited to 20%. [The plaintiffs claim that the defendant vehicle did not temporarily stop in the temporary stop and got back the part of the plaintiff’s vehicle that entered the above intersection from the left side of the moving direction, so the negligence on the part of the defendant vehicle should not be limited to 20%.
According to the 12th 12 of the Evidence A, No. 7, No. 8, and No. 12, the marking of a stop line (No. 530) under the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act [Attachment 6] of the stop line at the entry point of the Twit-type intersection in this case is separate from the temporary suspension marking (No. 521) under the same Table.