(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.11 2015나15398

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.11 2015나15398

손해배상(자)

Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 91,808,568 and KRW 81,808,568 among them.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. At around 07:20 on February 3, 2012, the Plaintiff was injured by the Plaintiff’s shoulder door door, the entrance door of the subway line No. 6038 of the subway Line No. 6038 operated by the Korea Railroad Corporation was shut down automatically, and the Plaintiff’s shoulder was cut off between entrances, and suffered injury, such as the frame of the offline of the left-hand edge, etc. (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

2) The Defendant concluded a non-life insurance contract with the Korea Railroad Corporation for subway accidents.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 5, 8 through 12 (including each branch number if a branch number is attached) or video, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The plaintiff asserts that the accident of this case occurred due to the malfunction of the entrance of the train, which caused the error of the Korea Railroad Corporation which neglected the duty of care to manage subways to prevent the malfunction of subways while operating subways, and thus, the defendant, the insurer of the Korea Railroad Corporation, is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused by the accident of this case.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case did not occur due to the malfunction of the entrance of the train, but due to the defect of screen air installed on the platform, and that the maintenance and repair of screen air is in charge of the Korea Railroad Corporation other than the Korea Railroad Corporation. Since there was no error of the Korea Railroad Corporation in connection with the accident of this case, the defendant did not have a duty to compensate for the damage caused by

According to each description or image of evidence Nos. 9, 10, 16, and 20, a screen air is installed on the platform of the powder station in which the instant accident occurred, and the screen air is designed to pass through a radio (RF) device. The screen air is closed until a train arrives on the platform.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.06.12 2016가단519207

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.02.04 2012가단5115970

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.4.29.선고 2013나39826 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.18 2012가단328795

-수원지방법원 2018.12.13 2018나70608