(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.05.07 2019나50784

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) 서울남부지방법원 2020.05.07 2019나50784

손해배상(자)

Text

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

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for the payment of KRW 56,015,787.

Reasons

1. The content of the court's explanation in this part is that "No. 2 (including a serial number)" is added to "No. 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance (based on recognition)," and "Joint 8 of the same part is jointly and severally "(Article 724 (2) of the Commercial Act)" and "the legal nature of the victim's direct right to claim compensation against the insurer as a result of the insurer taking over the insured's direct right to claim compensation against the insurer as a result of the insurer taking over the insured's damage liability overlappingly, and the obligor and underwriter are jointly and severally and severally in a subjective joint and several liability relationship. The insurer's assumption of the insurer's obligation is made at the request of the insured (insurance Contract or mutual aid contract). Thus, the insurer's obligation to claim compensation and the insured's damage liability is jointly and severally liable (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da53754, Oct. 28, 2010)."

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. According to the result of the appraisal conducted by the appraiser G in the first instance trial on the assessment of damages and the fact-finding inquiry conducted by the appraiser G in this court, the said appraiser calculated the swine-related damage caused by the instant accident as follows (damage Table 1). The results of the appraisal are determined to be reasonable, and there is no other significant error, and thus, it should be recognized that KRW 22,479,163 is the amount of damage related to pigs in accordance with the result of the said appraisal. [Damages Table 1] 2] The Defendants asserted that the period of damage for 84 days is too excessive, and that the Plaintiff also has considerable responsibility for delay in restoration to its original state.

According to the above evidence, this case is examined.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-상법 제724조 제2항

참조판례

-대법원 2010. 10. 28. 선고 2010다53754 판결

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.04.02 2020나61746

-전주지방법원 2019.02.14 2017나14409

-서울서부지방법원 2016.03.24 2015나35472

-대법원 2018.10.25 2018다234177

-울산지방법원 2016.12.07 2015가단60312