beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 7,350,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from June 3, 2016 to January 19, 2018.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. Facts of recognition 1) A vehicle B entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”);
A) On October 16, 2015, around 16:08, the vehicle C owned by the Plaintiff (type: HNDA ACUR MDX, hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) that was left left to the right from the left side of the direction while making a left turn at the intersection without signal, etc. in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seocho-gu.
) The front side of the Defendant vehicle was shocked on the right side (hereinafter “instant accident”).
(2) On October 17, 2015, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was damaged on the right side due to the instant accident, and was stored in the inside gymnas, Inc. (hereinafter “hymnas”). Since March 29, 2016, the repair was completed on April 15, 2016.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the facts of recognition of liability and limitation of liability, the Plaintiff suffered property loss due to the operation of the Defendant’s vehicle, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is liable for compensating the Plaintiff for the damages caused by the instant accident as an insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle.
However, in light of the developments leading up to the occurrence of the instant case, since D, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was negligent in neglecting the duty of care, such circumstance should be considered in calculating the amount of damages that the Defendant would compensate, but the Defendant’s liability is limited to 75% by deeming the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as 25%.
2. Scope of liability for damages
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion that: (a) the Plaintiff was unable to use the Plaintiff’s vehicle from October 17, 2015 to April 18, 2016, when the Plaintiff was placed in the Shoho Mag Mag Mag Mag Mag Mag Mag Mag, and leased the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the same class from November 6, 2015 to April 18, 2016; and (b) KRW 4,5920,00 (=400 won x 164 days x 164 days 0.3); (c) the Plaintiff’s fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle is KRW 3,444,00,00, equivalent to 75%.