logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.15 2014나68623
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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to a motor vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to B cab (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On May 13, 2014, at around 18:07, C, driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the direction of the city in the middle of an intersection without signal lights, etc. (hereinafter “instant intersection”) running on the right side from the left side of the Plaintiff’s proceeding to the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle while driving the Defendant’s side road near the city community center in the main case 2-dong community service center in the main case. At the time, there was an accident that conflicts with the front part of the right side part of the Defendant’s vehicle and the rear wheels part of the Plaintiff’s left side of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. At the time of the instant accident, the road situation surrounding the intersection is the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving side, and the direction of the Defendant’s vehicle driving side was the house of the decline. The vehicle parked in each direction of the driving of the original Defendant’s vehicle and the vehicle was parked in the direction of the driving. Accordingly, it was difficult for the original Defendant to find the other party to enter the intersection in advance. The Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding without taking measures such as temporarily stopping at the intersection or reducing the speed, while the Defendant’s vehicle discovered the Plaintiff’s vehicle and was in urgent action, but did not reach the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

On May 28, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 270,000 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle as insurance money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1-1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted by the parties, the accident of this case is the defendant's moment that the plaintiff's vehicle enters the intersection and passes it.

arrow