beta
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 fact that there is no dispute over the cause of the claim, comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions in Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the purport of all the images and arguments, the plaintiff's automobile insurance (hereinafter "the plaintiff's vehicle") was under way by passing a charge station at around 10:00 on October 14, 2014, but the vehicle B (the defendant's vehicle insurance; hereinafter "the defendant's vehicle") passing through the charge station at the left side of the road (the defendant's vehicle's vehicle insurance; hereinafter "the defendant's vehicle"), while changing the lane to the access road to the right side of the road, there was an accident that conflicts with the plaintiff's vehicle on the side of the plaintiff's vehicle, and the plaintiff's total repair cost of the plaintiff's vehicle occurred on October 31, 2014; however, there is no evidence to support the payment of the plaintiff's KRW 1,641,00 (106).6.
According to the above facts, the driver of the vehicle on the part of the defendant is liable to compensate the owner of the vehicle on the part of the plaintiff for damages caused by the illegal act, and the owner of the vehicle on the part of the plaintiff can directly claim the defendant who is the insurer of the vehicle on the part of the defendant, and the plaintiff acquired the right to claim the above compensation against the defendant by paying the repair cost of the vehicle on the part of the plaintiff.
Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant, barring special circumstances, prescribed the Civil Act from October 31, 2014, which recognized that it is reasonable for the Plaintiff to dispute as to the existence or scope of the obligation of performance from October 31, 2014, which was the date of the above payment of repair costs, to the date of the first instance judgment, which was January 14, 2016.