beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Around June 2016, the Plaintiff (formerly: C) who runs the freight forwarding business requested the Defendant, who runs the freight forwarding business, to transport the goods of the post office unit to the Busan Postal Clustering State.
B. Around 00:17 on June 30, 2016, the Defendant started the following transportation of the truck loaded with the above cargo on the E4.5 tons of truck affiliated with D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”). Around June 30, 2016, a fire that occurred while the Defendant’s vehicle was operated in the vicinity of the window of Changwon-si, Changwon-si (hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. The Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 174,477,754 to the owners of the above cargo, and received a total of KRW 138,667,754 from the FF Mutual Aid Association that entered into a mutual aid agreement with D (hereinafter “Nonindicted Mutual Aid Association”).
However, the Plaintiff was not paid KRW 35,810,00 under the pretext of deduction of mutual aid money, etc. from the Non-Party Financial Cooperative on the ground that the freight exceeding 2,860km was loaded in the Defendant’s vehicle.
Meanwhile, the transport fee that the Plaintiff did not pay to the Defendant in relation to the said cargo transport is KRW 14,750,010 in total.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The carrier shall be liable for damages resulting from the loss of, damage to, or delay in arrival of the cargo unless he/she proves that he/she, or any other person employed for the carriage has not been negligent in giving due attention to the receipt, delivery, storage, and carriage of the cargo.
(Article 135 of the Commercial Act). According to the above facts, the accident of this case occurred while transporting cargo, and the plaintiff suffered damage equivalent to the value of the cargo, so the defendant does not prove that there was no negligence in relation to the transportation.