logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.23 2017가단109579
채무부존재확인의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the claim

A. 1 The gist of the claim is as follows: (a) an accident as described in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) Even if there is no objective evidence to prove that the instant accident occurred, the instant accident is a minor drilling accident, and the Defendant’s spouse who was accompanied by the Defendant and the Defendant’s vehicle did not suffer injury.

B. The main text of Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act provides that "a person who operates an automobile for his/her own sake shall be liable to compensate for damage if he/she has killed or injured another person due to the operation of the automobile," which provides that "if a person who is not a passenger has died or injured, he/she shall not be held responsible to pay attention to the operation of the automobile, and he/she has not been negligent in paying attention to the operation of the automobile, and it shall not apply in cases where he/she proves that a person who has not been a passenger or a third person, other than his/her own driver, has intentionally or negligently caused any defect in the structure or function of the automobile, and that a person who is not a passenger of the vehicle or a passenger of another vehicle has been killed or injured, he/she shall not be held liable to compensate for the damage caused by the accident of the vehicle, and the burden of proof as to the reasons for exemption shall be acknowledged in light of the following circumstances:

arrow