logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.07.09 2015나300149
손해배상(자)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 16, 2012, the Plaintiff driven a vehicle E (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) at around 22:00, and turned down the two-lane road in front of G in the Gumi City F along the two-lanes from the H oil station to the 2nd intersection, while driving the two-lanes from the H oil station to the 2nd intersection, and the Plaintiff shocked the part behind the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle owned by Defendant D (hereinafter “Defendant”), which was stopped at the end of the two-lane side of the moving direction, in front of the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and then down the part behind the left side of the Defendant’s I vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).

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

The location where the instant accident occurred is two-lanes in which the width of one lane is about 3.2m, about 3.3m, and about 0.75m in width of the side, which are about 7.25m in total width. At the time of the instant accident, the sloped surface was damp at the time of the instant accident.

C. Defendant Hyundai Cargo Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Hyundai Cargo Insurance Co., Ltd”) is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with Defendant D with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant D was not aware that the vehicle was a parking vehicle because it illegally parked on the side of the two-lane road, which is a zone where parking and stopping is prohibited at night. Since the above negligence of the defendant D caused the occurrence of the accident of this case and the expansion of damage, the defendant D is a tort, and the defendant Hyundai C is an insurer for the defendant's vehicle, and each of the plaintiff is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.

B. At the time of the Defendants’ assertion, Defendant D only stopped the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident, but did not turn the tail lights and the sidelights.

arrow