(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.08.12 2014가단60766

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) 울산지방법원 2015.08.12 2014가단60766

손해배상(자)

Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around 09:10 on March 22, 2014, the network D (hereinafter referred to as “the network”) driven a road adjacent to the EF in Ulsan-dong, Ulsan-gu, U.S., U.S., on its own, the two-lanes of the two-lanes between the two-lanes from the surface of the Dongbu Police Station at the speed of 21km from the surface of the Dongbu Police Station at the speed of 21km.

B. Nonparty H driving a I bus (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) and was proceeding at a speed of 73 km per hour depending on the one-lane between the two-lanes in the direction of the Deceased’s Obane.

C. The Defendant’s vehicle was an intersection in the annexed “accident site map” and was approaching the Deceased’s Otoba, but the Deceased was proceeding from the two lanes to the one-lane.

I changed the course to the plaintiff's own vehicle rapidly. D.

H did not avoid the Deceased’s misuse and part on the right part of the Defendant’s vehicle, and caused the Deceased’s injury to the Deceased, such as cerebral cerebral dystropha, by shocking the left part on the left part, and the Deceased died on the day following the day.

(hereinafter “instant accident”) e.

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs are the wife and children of the deceased, and the defendant is the mutual aid business operator who has concluded a mutual aid agreement that compensates for losses incurred during the operation of the defendant vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3 evidence, Eul 1-1, 2-2

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff violated his duty to drive safely by fulfilling his duty to drive safely as the driver of the defendant vehicle, who was the driver of the vehicle in front of the front line, and the accident of this case occurred at the wind that occurred by the central line, and therefore, the deceased and the plaintiffs are liable to compensate for the damages caused by the accident of this case.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserted that the instant accident was caused by the deceased’s unilateral negligence, and thus, the Defendant is not liable for damages.

B. Whether the judgment H violated the responsibilities of the front line.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2016.10.26 2015나22205

-서울서부지방법원 2016.09.30 2015나5501

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.01.08 2018가합546066

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.27 2015가단5139052

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.05.30 2017가단72888