logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
창원지방법원 2015.09.08 2015나2984
손해배상(자)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On November 23, 199, 17:30 on November 23, 199, B, while driving a vehicle owned by B and driving on the road in front of the road D located in the Changwon-si window D, the Plaintiff’s child is the front part of the above vehicle, and the F goes beyond F as at the time, and the Plaintiff was faced with the threshold on the road (hereinafter “instant accident”).

2) At the time of the instant accident, the Defendant was the insurer which entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with B with respect to the said vehicle. 2) The F was diagnosed as the left-hand side of the upper left-hand side of the accident immediately after the instant accident, such as a hump, a hump of the left-hand side of the upper left-hand side of the accident, a hump, a hump,

In addition, from July 200, F began to receive medical treatment for the donation, stove, and stoves, etc. from around July 2000, and on December 15, 2005, F was diagnosed at the Gviolology, and was suffering from the Mean disease from around 2004.

B. The Plaintiff, the father of the victim F, who was the victim of the economic damage compensation for the Plaintiff, was treated from the age of nine to nine. The Plaintiff, the father of the victim, could not be accompanied by his guardian at the time of diagnosis and treatment of the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff, the father of the victim, caused “economic loss”, “actual loss (economic loss) of the nature of compensation for loss,” and “the minimum economic loss of income necessary for the care of the minor” as the guardian, the Defendant should pay the Plaintiff KRW 16,122,240 equivalent to the amount of the damage.

2. It is not sufficient to view that the Plaintiff’s assertion was caused by the instant accident, solely on the basis of each of the statements and other materials submitted by the Plaintiff, as set forth in subparagraphs 1 through 11 (including paper numbers), and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Even if the damage alleged by the Plaintiff occurred, it is also deemed that there is a proximate causal relation with the instant accident.