logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.08.21 2019가단113254
손해배상(자)
Text

The Defendant’s payment of KRW 10,00,00 for each of the said money to Plaintiff A and each of the said money from September 9, 2018.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) E is a Fcar owned by itself on September 9, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) such as the right road.

)를 운전하여 남양주시 경춘로 2521-3에 있는 진벌마을버스정류장 앞 교차로를 창현리 쪽에서 진벌마을 쪽으로 비보호 좌회전을 하던 중 샛터교차로 쪽에서 창현리 쪽으로 2차로 중 2차선을 따라 차량 진행신호에 따라 직진하던 G가 운전하는 오토바이의 앞 부분을 피고 차량의 앞 범퍼 부분으로 충격하였다(이하 ‘이 사건 사고’라고 한다

2) As a result of the instant accident, G was entirely destroyed and scrapped due to the injury inflicted upon G (hereinafter “the deceased”), the Deceased’s Havidson’s Havidson Heit Clasic, 1868C, hereinafter “the deceased Obane”).

3) The Plaintiff A is the father and mother of the Deceased’s children, the Plaintiff B, and C. The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract against the Defendant vehicle. [The Defendant is the insurer who has concluded the comprehensive automobile insurance contract against the Defendant vehicle (the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in the Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, and No.

B. According to the recognition and scope of the above recognition of liability, as the deceased died due to the operation of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant, as the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the instant accident.

C. The Defendant asserts that the above negligence of the deceased should be taken into account in calculating the amount of damages, since the Defendant neglected the deceased’s duty of care for pre-delivery and did not wear a safety mother.

However, as recognized earlier, the Deceased passed through the intersection according to the vehicle’s passage signals and the Defendant’s vehicle has made a left-hand left-hand turn. The evidence submitted by the Defendant alone alone alone neglected the Deceased’s duty of care in front of the war.

1.2.2.

arrow