beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 141,382,858 as well as 5% per annum from February 18, 2014 to September 14, 2017 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On February 18, 2014, at around 09:00, B driven a C Lebing Vehicle (hereinafter “Accom”) and caused injury, such as a fluorization of the left fluoral fluor, to the Plaintiff, on the part of the Plaintiff’s driver, who was directly engaged in the normal signal at the port of the death terminal, by violating the two-lane signal signal from the Gupode to the air of the new university located in the Gupool-dong, Seopodong-dong, Busan, along the two-lane signal from the Gupode to the air of the new university.
B. The Defendant is an insurance company that entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to a sea-going vehicle.
[In the absence of any dispute against recognition basis, entry and video (including a serial number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) of Gap's 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, B, while driving a sea vehicle in violation of the signal, caused the instant accident and sustained injury to the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant, the insurer of the sea vehicle, is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the instant accident.
B. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant’s liability should be limited inasmuch as the Plaintiff’s mistake was caused by the Plaintiff’s failure to wear a safety knee and knee protection stand, which is the Plaintiff’s fault, at the time of the instant accident. However, according to the evidence, it is reasonable to deem the instant accident to have occurred due to the mistake that the Plaintiff violated the signal on the straight-line signal and left left the left the right on the two-lane, which is the straight-line driver, and the Plaintiff’s wear the safety mother at the time of the instant accident (Evidence 1-2), and the Defendant’s assertion on this part is not acceptable. Meanwhile, the harmful act and the victim’s side conflict with each other.