logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.03.13 2017나499
손해배상(자)
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following order of payment shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. The grounds for this part of the claim for damages are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the corresponding part as follows. Thus, this part of the claim for damages is acceptable as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. We accept the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance

The instant accident is caused by the deceased’s failure to cross without permission from the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle in the course of avoiding the Defendant’s vehicle while the deceased walked on the side of the two-way road in which the central separation cost was installed by the fleet, while walking on the side of the two-way road, and the accident occurred in the course of avoiding the Defendant’s vehicle. Such care is also deemed to have caused the instant accident.

However, according to Gap evidence Nos. 3 and Eul evidence Nos. 5 (including each number), the accident of this case occurred at about 11:30 and was brightness and clear, and there was no obstacle that could interfere with the view of the front side because the shape of the road was straight, and there was no obstacle that could interfere with the front side of the road; ② from the south Pyeong-distance flood slope that the deceased was presumed to walk on the side of the road to the point of the accident of this case, some of the roads surrounding the road are presumed not to have opened a road on which pedestrians could walk at the time; ③ the deceased found the defendant vehicle, which was trying to cross without permission on the side of the road of the defendant vehicle driving direction at the middle of the two-lanes, and ④ The driver of the defendant vehicle would have stopped the road immediately from the middle of the two-lane road along the moving direction of the vehicle of this case to the side of the road without permission on the road of this case to reduce the speed of the deceased to the end of the road immediately before the end of the road of this case.

arrow