(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.11.18 2020나24436

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.11.18 2020나24436

손해배상(의)

Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part which is dismissed or added as set forth in paragraph (2) below or as set forth in paragraph (3). Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as

2. The height of the judgment of the first instance court shall be the “Plaintiff” of the 3rd page 5 and 7 of the judgment of the first instance court.

The 50% "50%" in the 12th sentence of the first instance court shall be raised to "60%".

3. The plaintiff asserts that the added portion should not reduce the amount of damages and limit the defendant's liability again because the ratio of contribution to the king was only a ground for limitation of liability.

In the event that the king contributed to the occurrence of a specific injury to the victim as a result of the aggravation of or the prolonged period for treatment, or the expansion of the degree of subsequent disability after the completion of treatment, due to the aggravation of the victim's king in competition with the accident, it is reasonable to have the victim bear the amount of compensation corresponding to the victim's total damages according to the degree recognized that the king contributed to the occurrence of the whole result of the injury including a specific injury (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da8902, May 30, 2019). In light of the above legal principles, the plaintiff's king certificate should not be considered only as the grounds for the defendant's limitation of liability, but it should be recognized as the remainder of the damage in consideration of the degree of contribution to the purchase of treatment expenses, auxiliary equipment, nursing expenses, etc., so the plaintiff's assertion cannot be accepted.

4. The judgment of the first instance is just, and all appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

참조판례

-대법원 2019. 5. 30. 선고 2015다8902 판결

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2020.05.27 2019나53051

-인천지방법원 2018.06.20 2017나67530

-전주지방법원 2018.10.12 2016나2492

-대법원 1994. 11. 25. 선고 94다1517 판결

-대법원 2004. 11. 26. 선고 2004다47734 판결