logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.17 2019나43803
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. On October 7, 2018, at the time of the occurrence of the basic fact-finding accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving at the location near the new road (hereinafter “instant road”) located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government at the location around October 21, 2018 at the time of the occurrence of the insured vehicle CD, and the vehicle driving at the location near the new road located in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant road”) was in conflict with the Defendant’s vehicle that attempted to change the first lane due to the preceding vehicle parked at the two lanes and stopped. On November 14, 2018, the instant accident occurred after the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the front side of the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle. The amount of the insurance money paid at KRW 1,992,00,000, self-damage charges of KRW 498,000 for self-damage on self-loss on self-loss, which was paid at the end of the instant accident is as follows.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's statements or images as to Gap's 1 to 6 and 8, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, which are acknowledged in full view of the purport of the argument as seen earlier, the Defendant vehicle attempted to change the lane into one lane in the vicinity of the Plaintiff vehicle, i.e., the Defendant vehicle attempted to drive on the right side of the Plaintiff vehicle, and the left side part of the Plaintiff vehicle and the Defendant vehicle damaged due to the instant accident, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident occurred due to the Defendant vehicle’s primary negligence by attempting to change the lane from a distance close to the Plaintiff vehicle without thoroughly examining the situation of the Plaintiff vehicle running on another vehicle.

나. 다만, 앞서 든 증거에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정 즉, 피고 차량과 그 후방의 번호 불상의 택시가 좌측 방향지시등을 켠 채로 원고 차량이 주행하던 1차로로 차로 변경을 시도하고 있었던 점, 원고 차량의 블랙박스 영상에도 위와 같은 상황이 촬영되어 있었으므로,...

arrow