logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2016.10.19 2015가단110294
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The damages liability of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) due to an accident entered in the attached list shall be 4.4.

Reasons

1. At around 11:30 on July 6, 2015, the Plaintiff did not regard the Defendant’s Dicker (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”) who was behind driving of the Plaintiff’s cless tramway-type construction machinery vehicles within the Dacheon-si B construction site, and caused an accident that shocks the front part (hereinafter “instant accident”).

As a result of the instant accident, the Defendant’s vehicle was damaged by the front driver and hedge lamps.

【Ground of recognition】 In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3-1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 4-1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (i) As to the claim for the leave of absence, the Defendant asserts that the repair period of about 20 days from the date of the instant accident is necessary. Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 100 million (5 million for the leave of absence per day) which is equivalent to the amount of the leave of absence during that period.

In light of the damaged condition of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Plaintiff can restore the vehicle to the repair plant without entering the repair plant, so it is not possible to acknowledge the temporary closure loss, and even if the temporary closure damage is recognized, it should be calculated on the basis of the Defendant’s revenue.

⑵ 판단 ㈎ 휴차손해 산정기간 앞서 든 증거와 이 법원의 E에 대한 사실조회결과에 의하면, 이 사건 사고로 인하여 피고 차량을 수리하기 위하여 공장에 입고할 필요가 있는 기간은 도장(도색) 작업을 위한 3일이고, 출장수리가 가능한 부분이 있어 그 부분 출장수리에 필요한 기간은 4일인 사실을 인정할 수 있으므로 이 사건 사고로 인한 휴차 손해는 도장 작업을 위해 공장에 입고가 필요한 3일간으로 산정함이 상당하다.

Although the Defendant asserts to the effect that the period required for the repair of a business trip cannot be operated and work for that period, it should be included in the period of the temporary closure damage. However, in light of the descriptions or images of the evidence No. 3-1 to No. 3, and No. 4, it is as follows.

arrow