logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2016.11.25 2016나51211
구상금
Text

1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurance company that has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract that covers self-vehicle damage of Ayone Star or six passenger cars (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurance company that has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract that covers property damage of BM5 vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 12, 2015, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding along the intersection (hereinafter “instant intersection”) in front of the D cafeteria located in Chuncheon City, Chuncheon (hereinafter “instant intersection”) from the direction of the Tamam-dong sports along the Tam-dong private distance. On October 12, 2015, the Plaintiff’s vehicle conflict with the front door of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, even if the left door of the Defendant’s right side, which was left left at the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s passage, at the instant intersection.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

Due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff spent KRW 1,364,00 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 6 evidence, Eul's 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleading, or the whole pleading

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the accident of this case occurred by negligence of 100% of the defendant's vehicle that tried to make a left- or U-turn to the left-hand turn, and the defendant is obligated to pay the full amount of KRW 1,364,00 paid by the plaintiff as the repair cost of the plaintiff

3. Determination

(a) Negligence ratio: 70% of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and 30% of the Defendant’s vehicle shall be considered as follows: (1) In cases where the vehicle that intends to make a left-hand turn at an intersection where traffic control is not conducted, in principle, has the right of preference to the left-hand vehicle, or where the vehicle that intends to make a left-hand turn has already entered the intersection and has converted the direction to the left-hand one, the vehicle that intends to make a left-hand turn prior to the entry into the intersection shall not interfere

However, the intersection of this case is an intersection where traffic is not controlled, and the defendant's vehicle is the intersection first.

arrow