logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.28 2019가단5125440
구상금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed with the Plaintiff KRW 22,00,000 and 5% per annum from February 23, 2019 to October 28, 2020.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 17, 2018, around 16:13, D had a fire in a house leased and resided from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation.

B. The point where the fire occurred is inside the front kick kickboard which D purchased and used on the Internet.

D around August 2018, on the Internet, purchased the electric kickboard of this case with a heavy load, and there was a symptoms of not being filled normally at the end of September, and thus, on October 10, Defendant 1’s request to repair it to the official repair center of this case and received the replacement of the exhauster with a diagnosis of more than the exhauster.

(10.12. "Maintenance Work" and 10.14. "Processing Date" are written on the repair statement, and it is unclear at any time and on the two days.

On February 22, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 31,130,000,000 insurance money for damage caused by fire, based on the property comprehensive insurance contract entered into with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation of Housing.

Defendant 1 is the manufacturer of the above electric kickboard, and Defendant 2 concluded a product liability insurance with Defendant 1.

[Judgment of the court below] No. 1-4, inquiry of fact by the National Research and Investigation Institute of Science, D's testimony, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Ministry of Product Liability;

A. Product liability doctrine must prove the causal relationship between the defect, damage, and damage of the product.

However, in cases where liability for damages is imposed on a manufacturer for reasons of defects in mass-produced products due to the concentration of high technology, the process of manufacturing the product can only be seen by a manufacturer who is an expert, and whether the damage was caused by a defect, as a general public, is difficult to clarify the characteristics that make it difficult for consumers to prove the causal relationship between the defect and the defect, and the occurrence of damage, in cases where an accident occurs while the product is normally used.

arrow