Whether the ship owner has a duty of care for the safe operation

Unless there are special circumstances, the owner of the vehicle loaded with the cargo is only the passenger of the vehicle involved in the accident, but can not be considered as a driver, driver, or driver who has enjoyed the right to control and driving benefits, and thus, he/she has no positive duty of care to cooperate in the safe operation of the driver, such as ventilation of attention to prevent the accident.

Articles 396 and 750 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Yucheon Cargo Company

Cheongju District Court (83 Gohap365)

The original judgment shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 the amount of 17,781,82 won, 17,661,822 won to the plaintiff 2 and the amount of money calculated by the rate of 5 percent per annum from August 20, 1983 to the date of full payment.

The plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

All of the costs of lawsuit shall be ten minutes for the first and second trials, and one of them shall be borne by the plaintiffs, and the remainder by the defendants.

The above two paragraphs can be provisionally executed.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 the amount of 19,698,575 won, the amount of 17,958,575 won to the plaintiff 2 and the amount of 5 percent per annum from August 20, 1983 to the sentencing day, and the amount of money according to the rate of 25 percent per annum from the next day to the full payment day.

The court costs shall be borne by the defendant and a declaration of provisional execution (the reduction of the claim by the plaintiff 1 in the trial, the plaintiff 2 in the claim extension).

The part against the defendant in the original judgment shall be revoked, and the plaintiffs' claims against this shall be dismissed.

All the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs in the first and second instances.

Among the parts against the plaintiffs in the original judgment, the part corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 an amount of 1,598,931 won, 2,035,577 won to the plaintiff 2, and an amount of money calculated by the rate of 25 percent per annum from August 20, 1983 to the date of full payment.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant in both the first and second trials and a declaration of provisional execution.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

성립에 다툼이 없는 갑 제1호증(호적등본), 갑 제3호증(사망진단서), 갑 제6호증의 6(사고보고서), 7(사고지점 부근약도), 8(교통사고 보고서), 10(실황조사서), 11(진술조서), 12, 13, 14, 15(각 피의자신문조서), 17(판결문)의 각 기재에 변론의 전취지를 종합하면 피고회사 소유의 (차량번호 생략)호 화물자동차의 운전사인 소외 1이 1983. 8. 20. 01:30경 위 자동차를 운전하여 충북 청원군 부용면 외천리 소재 경부고속도로 서울기점 129.9킬로미터 상행선상을 서울방면을 향하여 시속 70킬로미터의 속력으로 진행하다가 앞을 잘살펴 조심스럽게 운전하지 아니하고 잠시 졸면서 운전한 과실로 말미암아 전방 우측 노면에서 자동차고장을 수리하기 위하여 후미 깜박이등을 켜고 정차하고 있던 (차량번호 생략)호 화물자동차를 미처 발견하지 못하고 피고회사의 화물자동차 전면 부위로 정차중인 위 화물자동차의 뒷부분을 들이받아 그 충격으로 피고회사의 화물자동차에 타고 있던 소외 2가 좌측 경비골 골절등의 상해를 입고 청주시 소재 서울병원에서 같은날 03:20경 사망한 사실, 원고 1은 망 소외 2의 처이고 원고 2는 위 망인의 딸인 사실을 인정할 수 있고 달리 반증이 없으므로 피고는 자기를 위하여 위 자동차를 운행하는 자로서 자동차손해배상보장법에 따라 그 운행으로 일으킨 위 사고로 인하여 소외 2가 사망함으로써 입게 된 원고들의 손해를 배상해줄 책임이 있다 할 것이다.

However, since the accident occurred while the deceased non-party 2 entered the contract of carriage with the defendant company and loaded the cargo to the non-party 1, he was on the front of thelight and was in Seoul, the above deceased's duty of care to ensure safe driving by giving attention to the non-party 1, who is a driving public official with operating power and operating interests to prevent driving fees, and when driving fees is cut, the accident in this case occurred due to negligence of neglecting the duty of care to allow the non-party 1 to stop at the safe place and to stop the operation of the vehicle again after sufficient rest, and thus, the defendant's damages amount should be considered in determining the defendant's damages amount. Thus, the non-party 2's assertion that the non-party 1's driver's driver's duty of care to prevent the collision between the above accident and the non-party 1's driver's driver's duty of care and the non-party 4's driver's driver's duty of care to ensure safe driving of the vehicle.

2. Scope of damages.

(a) Property damages;

(1) Estimated import loss amount

The above evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of Gap evidence Nos. 2, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Gap evidence Nos. 8 (Judgment), Gap evidence Nos. 7 (Certificate of Payment) which is acknowledged as genuine by the testimony of non-party Nos. 4 of the court below, and the testimony of the above witness, the average remaining 39 years of age as of August 5, 194, and 36 years of age. The above deceased was no longer 50 days of age as of the time of the accident of this case, since the above evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of the above evidence Nos. 2, the above evidence Nos. 3 and 4 of the deceased's evidence Nos. 1, 50, and the above evidence Nos. 1 and 5 of the deceased's evidence Nos. 2, 300,000 won of the above evidence No. 20,000 won of the above evidence No. 50,000 won of the disaster of this case.

Therefore, the above deceased would have obtained income of KRW 210,00 ( KRW 315,00 x 2/3) per month from the monthly income, which would have been able to obtain each month from the above occupation without the above accident until the end of 55 years of age from the date of the above accident, which would have incurred losses from the above accident, in order from the above accident occurred each month, and the plaintiffs claim damages to be incurred each month from the above accident. Thus, since the plaintiffs claim for the amount of damages to be incurred each month, it is clear that the daily income of 203 months from October 20 to August 4, 200, which would be 5/12% of the monthly income of 203 years of age from the date of the above accident, is calculated as the present value at the time of the above accident pursuant to the Hodman Accounting Act, which deducts the interim interest at the rate of KRW 30,843,645 ( KRW 210,00 x 21084).

(2) Active damages

As funeral expenses for the deceased, the plaintiff 1 paid KRW 360,00, and the plaintiff 2 paid KRW 240,000, respectively, as there is no dispute between the parties, each of the above expenditure amounts is also the damage suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case.

(b) consolation money;

The above deceased's death due to the above traffic accident can be sufficiently recognized in light of the empirical rule that the wife of the deceased as well as his wife and the plaintiffs, who are his father, suffered considerable mental pain. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay this in cash. In light of all circumstances such as the deceased and the plaintiffs' age, family relation, property level, circumstance of the accident of this case and the result, etc. as shown in the argument of this case, it is reasonable to pay the above deceased 2,00,000 won for the above deceased, and the amount of consolation money to the plaintiffs 1,00,000 won for each of them.

(c) Inheritance relationship;

As seen above, the damage claim of the above deceased was 32,843,645 won (30,843,645 won + 2,00,000 won) including the expected income loss and consolation money (the sum of 32,843,645 won). The plaintiffs' joint property heir of the above deceased succeeded to the damage claim of the above deceased according to their respective statutory shares in inheritance. Thus, the plaintiffs succeeded to the damage claim of the deceased in proportion to their respective statutory shares in inheritance. Therefore, the plaintiffs shall be deemed to have acquired each claim for damages of 16,421,82 won (32,843,645 won x

3. Conclusion

Thus, the defendant is obligated to accept the plaintiffs 17,61,822 won per annum from August 20, 1983 to full payment rate of 5 percent per annum (16,421,82 won + active damages + 360,000 won + 1,000 won per annum from 16,661,822 won per annum from 20,000 won per annum from 17,781,822 won per annum from 20,000 won per annum from 9,000 won per annum from 9,000 won per annum from 1983,000 won per annum from 9,000 won per annum from 9,000 won per annum from 19,000 won per annum from 9,000 won per annum from 16,000 to 9,000 won per annum from 96, as the defendant is not obligated to accept the plaintiffs' claim for damages from 96,000 reasons to 96.

Judges Cho Gyeong-sung (Presiding Judge)