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. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with A and BK3 motor vehicles owned by it (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) with the insurance period from September 24, 2013 to September 24, 2014, and the Defendant concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with C passenger cars (hereinafter “Defendant”).
B. Around 09:10 on January 10, 2014, D operated the Plaintiff’s vehicle and proceeded to the center line of the two-lanes near the Hopo-si, Hopo-si, Hopo-si, Hopo-si. However, the Defendant’s vehicle proceeding from the opposite direction to the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle caused an accident to shock the front left side of the Defendant’s vehicle on the left side of the Plaintiff’s front side (hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. The instant accident site is a two-lane road from each other. At the time of the instant accident, vehicles were parked on the left and right side of the road. Meanwhile, on February 7, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,396,400 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The instant accident occurred in violation of the duty of safe driving of both the Plaintiff and the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant, the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, should pay KRW 1,698,200, equivalent to 50% of the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle out of the repair cost paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff
B. The instant accident was caused by the driver’s negligence of the Plaintiff vehicle.
3. According to the above recognized facts and the evidence as seen earlier, the instant accident was caused by the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, because D, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was parked on both sides of the road at the site of the instant accident, and thus, D, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, has to pay more attention to the vehicle travelling along with the vehicle coming from the opposite direction while neglecting to do so.
However, the defendant vehicle shall be adequate.