logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.03 2015나42505
구상금
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. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On October 14, 2001, 14:02:02 on October 14, 2001, the driver of the vehicle in question is the B vehicle owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

(2) At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff did not subscribe to the liability insurance on the part of the front part of the vehicle. As a result, the Defendant, the owner of the instant vehicle, who is the owner of the instant vehicle, paid KRW 40,000,000 to C the compensation for damages under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and filed a lawsuit for claiming compensation for damages against the Defendant, as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2004Da211601, supra.

3) On December 10, 204, the above court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on December 10, 2004 that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 40,000,000 won with 5% per annum from May 9, 2002 to October 20, 2004, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.” The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time. 4) The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on December 10, 204 in order to interrupt the extinctive prescription of the Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

B. According to the above facts of recognition, as long as the completion of the extinctive prescription of the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity established by the previous judgment is imminent, the Plaintiff is entitled to bring the instant lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 40 million won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from May 9, 2002 to October 20, 2004 and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

2. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.

arrow