logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.02.17 2020나34577
구상금
Text

1. The part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment among the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”) and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

B. On November 26, 2019, the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered a private distance intersection while driving along a road in the EF school located in Asan-si, Asan-si. The Defendant’s vehicle, who entered the right-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was an accident that shocks the right-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

(c)

By December 13, 2019, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 7,852,300 except for KRW 500,000 to the Plaintiff’s automobile repair cost.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 10 evidence, Eul 1 through 3 evidence (including each number in the case of a number) and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff’s instant accident occurred due to the total negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, while the Plaintiff’s vehicle was entering the intersection after temporary suspension and driving at the intersection, and the Defendant’s vehicle proceeds as it is on the right-hand side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle without looking at the front side.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to the Plaintiff’s entry into the intersection at an rapid speed without temporarily stopping while the Defendant’s vehicle is straight on the right side, and at least 80% of the fault ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is at least 80%.

(c)

Judgment

1) The following circumstances, which are acknowledged in addition to the purport of the entire argument as seen earlier, namely, ① the crossing of the instant accident, is situated on the right side of the Defendant vehicle in the same width as the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving and the direction of the Defendant’s driving, and there is a temporary road sign in the direction of the Plaintiff’s driving. ② However, the Plaintiff’s vehicle is the intersection where the instant

arrow