logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.20 2019나64145
구상금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are dismissed, respectively.

2. The costs arising from the appeal shall be the incidental appeal of the defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract for a large dump truck (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into an automobile mutual aid contract for D taxi vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On November 24, 2018, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding 6:17 Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, the Seocho-gu, at the seat of the Kafabro, the three-lane adjacent to the 1st century, and the Defendant’s vehicle was approaching three-lanes in order to stop in the vicinity of the 2nd crosswalk in order to make a wide right way to the passing intersection from the passing intersection. After that, the Plaintiff’s vehicle, while making a right way, had conflict between the chief side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s driver’s seat while driving the vehicle (hereinafter “the instant accident”). Accordingly, the Defendant’s passenger E was injured (Article 14 Section 5).

C. By March 27, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,675,550 [2,675,550 (the sum of expenses for after-the-counter treatment, consolation money, and other damages, etc. for after-the-counter treatment)] to E as insurance money.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry or video of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was entering the atmosphere to make a right-hand, and the Defendant’s vehicle entered the right-hand space of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and attempted to make a right-hand prior to the occurrence of the instant accident. As such, the instant accident was caused by the negligence between the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle, and it is reasonable to view the negligence ratio as 60 to the Defendant’s vehicle.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay 1,070,220 won (=2,675,550 won x 40%) equivalent to 40% of the insurance proceeds paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff and damages for delay.

(b) the Defendant.

arrow