logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.05.31 2017나314418
구상금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with ASP vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”). The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with BSP vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant 1”), and Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. in the first instance trial is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with CV vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant 2”).

B. On April 24, 2016, around 11:25, 2016, the driver D of the Plaintiff’s vehicle changed the vehicle to the third-party line while driving the vehicle from the river tunnel section on the national highway No. 66-10 to the second-party line on the national highway No. 7, 66-10 meters prior to the 100-on-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong, and then entered the third-party vehicle after the third-party vehicle, and then entered the second-party 1 of the E driver’s vehicle, which was driven behind the Plaintiff’s vehicle, in order to avoid a collision with the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the vehicle attempted to change the vehicle to the first-way line on the front side of the vehicle and the right side of the Defendant 1. The accident that conflicts on the left side of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. As a result of the above collision, Defendant 2. The vehicle committed a collision with the center separation zone and the right side of the proceeding direction with each other, and then re-convened with the center separation zone.

As the insurer of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the Plaintiff paid KRW 9,470,000 in total from May 26, 2016 to March 17, 2017 due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 4 through 6 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred is the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver, and the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver, Defendant 1. and Defendant 2.

arrow