logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.09 2020나50739
구상금
Text

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff and those incurred by supplementary participation.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”). The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to E vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

B. On July 28, 2019, around 15:39, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding to a straight line from a T-type T-type intersection without any signal located in the Sin-dong (hereinafter “instant intersection”), but was temporarily stopped in order to drive the Non-Party vehicle going on the opposite lane, and the Defendant’s vehicle, who attempted to enter the instant intersection from the left side of the Plaintiff’s running side of the instant intersection, stopped at the time of the instant intersection to turn to the left side of the Plaintiff’s seat in the process of moving to the instant intersection.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

On August 30, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 6,079,00 (excluding one’s own charges of KRW 500,000) as insurance money at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence revealed earlier, namely, (i) the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle have no signal apparatus installed in the instant intersection; (ii) the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle have to enter the instant intersection with due care as to the passage of the other party’s vehicle; and (iii) the Plaintiff’s vehicle, a vehicle directly engaged in the process of passing the instant intersection, has priority in proceeding; (iv) at the time of the instant accident, the Defendant’s vehicle first arrived at the instant intersection but failed to immediately enter the instant intersection due to Nonparty’s vehicle; and (iv) the Plaintiff’s vehicle stopped immediately before the instant intersection due to Nonparty’s vehicle, and at that time, the Defendant’s vehicle already arrived at the instant intersection.

arrow