logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.18 2016나73384
구상금
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On May 2, 2016, around 19:20 on May 2, 2016, the Plaintiff’s vehicle has turned to the left four-lanes near the Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu Incheon Metropolitan Gyeongdo Police Station, and continues to proceed without passing the intersection completely even after the signal to turn to the left was changed due to the traffic congestion. On the other hand, the Plaintiff’s vehicle in collision with the Defendant’s vehicle, who was directly in line with the straight signal from the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, causing damage to the rear part of the driver’s seat and the Defendant’s driver’s seat on the front side of the Plaintiff’s lighting.

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

On May 13, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 495,200 as insurance money to the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, Eul's 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The parties' assertion that the plaintiff argued that the driver of the defendant vehicle did not discover the plaintiff vehicle already entered the intersection and failed to drive the vehicle at a safe speed despite the duty of care to drive the vehicle on the left side of the road before entering the intersection of this case. Since the fault ratio of the defendant vehicle exceeds 70%, the defendant should pay to the plaintiff an amount equivalent to 70% of the above insurance proceeds.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case occurred due to negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle to turn left immediately, so the defendant's driver is not negligent.

B. (1) The driver of any motor vehicle is the intersection in which traffic is controlled by signal apparatus.

arrow