beta
Text
1. The Defendant: KRW 17,120,980, Plaintiff B, and D, respectively, and KRW 8,747,320, and KRW 10,747,320, and each of the above.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition 1) E is the FOscar on February 13, 2017 (hereinafter “Defendant”) around 23:24, 2017
) While driving a vehicle and driving a G which without permission crosses the red signal from the left side of the Defendant vehicle to the right side of the crosswalk installed near the crosswalk in front of the Geumcheon Police Station 1435 in the south-gu Seoul, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the front part of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).
(2) Due to the instant accident, G was set up in the H driver’s cab, which was going beyond the 2nd line of the said road, while driving the 2nd line on the said two-way road, and G was killed by low blood transfusion show around 9:25 on February 14, 2017.
(3) The Plaintiff’s spouse, Plaintiff B, C, and D of the Deceased is the deceased’s heir. The Defendant is the insurer who has concluded the automobile comprehensive insurance contract against the Defendant’s vehicle. The Defendant is the insurer who has concluded the automobile comprehensive insurance contract with the Defendant. The Defendant did not have any dispute as to the ground for recognition, the entries in the evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4, and the descriptions or images of the evidence No. 1 in the evidence No. 1 (including the branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply)
- The purport of the whole pleadings
B. 1) According to the above facts, as the deceased died due to the operation of the Defendant vehicle, the Defendant, as the insurer of the Defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the instant accident, barring any special circumstances. 2) As to this, the Defendant asserts that the Defendant, as the driver of the Defendant vehicle, should not be deemed to have fulfilled his duty of care by expectationing the deceased to cross the crosswalk by complying with the signals of the deceased, and by predicting that the deceased would cross the crosswalk without permission in violation of the pedestrian signal. Therefore, the Defendant’s driver should not be exempted from liability
According to the above evidence, the accident place is set at night as the 8th line, but it depends on it.