logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.24 2013가단5125738
손해배상(자)
Text

1. The Defendant shall start on June 16, 2012 with respect to the Plaintiff A, KRW 35,712,780, and KRW 35,712,780, and each of the above amounts.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Around 08:50 on June 16, 2012, C driving a D vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) and driving a road front of the exit station No. 1 located in the relay station 500, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, in the direction of the river basin in the direction of the river basin. On the first line, C was shocked by the network E-operation, which was followed by a U.S. driver’s license while driving a U.S. in the direction of the river basin, and the Deceased died on July 20, 2012, while receiving treatment due to the said accident.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

The plaintiffs are the parents of the deceased, and the defendant is the insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract for the defendant vehicle.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 5 through 12, Eul evidence 1 through 4, and 8 (including branch numbers if there are virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

(3) the witness G’s testimony, the entire purport of the pleading

2. Whether the defendant's liability is recognized and the limitation on liability is limited

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the instant accident occurred as follows: (a) the deceased’s end part, who was going behind while the Defendant’s vehicle was ordinarily going to the front side of the pedestrian heading of the front side of the pedestrian crossing, going beyond the center line to overtake the Defendant’s vehicle; and (b) the Defendant’s left side was shocked.

Therefore, the above accident was caused by the total negligence of the deceased, and the defendant's driver did not violate his duty of care and therefore the defendant is not liable for damages.

B. In full view of the evidence of the above-mentioned Paragraph 1, the following facts can be recognized.

(1) The location of the instant accident is one-lane where the U.S. and the left turn are permitted, and there is a zone where the U.S. 20.9m U.S. is permitted on the basis of the direction of the Defendant’s vehicle driving, and at the end, there is a pedestrian crosswalk, and there is an intersection where approximately 30m of it can turn to the left.

The location of the accident in this case is the area where the U.S.ton was allowed before the above crosswalk.

(2) The point where the Deceased’s accident occurred.

arrow