beta
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 circumstances leading up to the instant accident are as follows.
At the time of the accident, at around 13:12 August 13, 2018 at the time of the insured vehicle CD of the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff insured vehicle, and around 13:12, 200,00 won (based on recognition) for the payment of the collision insurance proceeds to the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving one-lane of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the road in the above intersection in the situation of the collision of the distance of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in Jung-gu, Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, and the purport of the entire pleadings or images and arguments as follows: (a) there is no dispute over the payment of the collision insurance proceeds to the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle moving back to the direction of the progress of the Plaintiff’s vehicle; (b) Gap’s 1 through 9, and Eul’s 1 through 4
2. Determination: (a) the Defendant driver shocked the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was driven under the new subparagraph while driving the vehicle; (b) however, in light of the overall circumstances that can be acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence, such as the location of the accident and the collision failure, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident was caused by the negligence of the Plaintiff driver who neglected to take care of the vehicle that was driven under the previous subparagraph and the Defendant’s driver who took care of the vehicle that was driven under the new subparagraph, and that the rate of negligence was 15:85.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 1,424,452 (i.e., total damage 1,91,120 x 85% x self-paid 200,000 won - Supreme Court Decision 2015Da236431 Decided January 28, 2016) as well as damages for delay calculated at each rate of 12% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from August 22, 2018, which is the date of the first instance judgment, which is appropriate to dispute over the existence or scope of the Defendant’s performance obligation, until September 27, 2019, and from the following day to the date of full payment, to the date of full payment.
3. Conclusion, the plaintiff.