beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,974,003 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from January 20, 2017 to April 17, 2018.
Reasons
A, on January 20, 2017, around 05:22, around 05:2, the occurrence of liability for damages caused by driving a B truck (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant 1 vehicle”) and stopped alone while driving at a point 250.6 km in the direction of Seoul on the west-gu, Seosan-si, Seog-si, Seog-si, Seoul, which driven the snow, with the right to protect the side side from the second side of the said expressway.
At this time, D Freight Vehicle C (hereinafter “Defendant 2”) driven a two-lane on the said expressway, which was stopped by Defendant 1, and as a result, Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 turned off, and Defendant 1 turned off the two-lanes on the said expressway at the same time.
E is driving a F Freight Vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff Vehicle") and driving on the said expressway two-lanes.
The defendant 2 found the stopping of the vehicle and avoided it into one-lane, and the front side of the plaintiff 1 vehicle shocked the right side of the defendant 1 vehicle.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). The Plaintiff is a party-in company that entered into an entry contract with G (the wife of E, a driver of the Plaintiff) on the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and is the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.
The defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement for defendant 1 and defendant 2.
[Ground of recognition] According to the above facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, and 8 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the entire pleadings and the recognition of the purport of the responsibility for the whole pleadings, the accident of this case is likely to cause an accident where Gap's 1, 2, 4, 10 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1, 2, 7, and 8 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) fail to operate properly the steering direction and brakes, resulting in an accident where he stops across several lanes of the expressway and stops on the road. In addition, the accident of this case is negligent in driving on the expressway at the time of a new wall where the defendant 1 did not take sufficient safety measures to prevent subsequent accidents, and in failing to reduce the speed