beta
Text
1. On July 4, 2018, around 15:10, the Plaintiff’s Defendant in relation to a traffic accident that occurred in the Yongsan-gu Seoul Winterdong.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. On July 4, 2018, around 15:10 on July 4, 2018, Nonparty A contacted the Defendant, a pedestrian, while driving a motor vehicle C (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) (hereinafter “instant accident”). The fact that the Plaintiff was an insurer who concluded the instant motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to the instant motor vehicle does not conflict between the parties, or is recognized by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the entries in evidence A Nos. 1 and 2, and images of evidence A No. 5.
B. According to the above facts of recognition of liability, it is recognized that the accident of this case occurred as a result of violation of the duty of ex officio with respect to driving by A, and therefore, the Plaintiff, the insurer of the motor vehicle of this case, is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the Defendant due to the accident of this case.
2. Scope of liability for damages
A. According to the purport of the written evidence No. 12 and the oral argument, the Defendant’s total amount of KRW 97,696 of the medical expenses spent by the Dental Medical Center and E Hospital is recognized as a result of the instant accident.
B. There is no evidence to prove the necessity of future medical treatment or the amount of the medical fees due to the instant accident, and it is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress due to the instant accident in light of the content of the instant accident and the progress of its treatment, etc., recognized by the aforementioned evidence.
[Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for future medical expenses and consolation money, etc. due to the instant accident, and rendered a judgment dismissing the future medical expenses and consolation money in its claim on June 12, 2019 (Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2018Da387373). It is concluded that the Plaintiff’s liability for damages against the Defendant does not exceed the above KRW 97,696, and as long as the Defendant contests this, the Defendant is able to seek confirmation.