logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.12.21 2018나24235
구상금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a non-profit corporation established for the purpose of common welfare, friendship, etc. among its members with a license for private taxi transportation business in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and is engaged in the business of compensating for the damage caused to a vehicle due to an accident during the period of possession, use, and management of the vehicle.

The plaintiff's assistant intervenor is the owner and driver of the private taxi B (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff's vehicle") and is the member of the plaintiff's ordinary inquiry.

The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to vehicles C (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On February 10, 2017, around 08:40 on February 10, 2017, the Defendant’s vehicle, where the accident occurred, was proceeding on the left-hand side of the railway crossing located in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, Yongsan-gu and 62 degrees from the side of the Han River and the Han River Water Site to the intersection.

At the same time, the Plaintiff’s vehicle has dried up with the Defendant’s vehicle to cross-road crossing, and the Defendant’s vehicle with a warning that the Plaintiff’s vehicle enters the train is front and rear to create a space for the Plaintiff’s vehicle to pass.

Rather, the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle, who was narrow and driving the space, did not go off on the vehicle.

The Plaintiff’s vehicle, which the Defendant Company stopped on the road, was unable to drive in the future, and the light rail that was driven along the railroad line, caused an accident where the front part of the Plaintiff’s front front part of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On April 6, 2017, the Plaintiff paid 6,150,000 won for repair costs to an industrial company that repaired the Plaintiff’s vehicle destroyed by the instant accident (hereinafter “instant repair cost”).

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 through 7 (including paper numbers) and Eul evidence Nos. 7, Gap evidence No. 4, and

arrow