logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.18 2017나10878
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid contract with B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On June 9, 2016, around 13:10, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was running along the two-lanes of the 4nd line road near the Geumdong-dong Geumdong-dong, Yongsandong-si, and at around 13:10, there was an accident that conflicts between the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle running along the first lane and the lower part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

From June 13, 2016 to August 5, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,727,630,00 to the passengers of the Plaintiff’s vehicle who suffered injury due to the instant accident, as agreed money and hospital treatment expenses.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 5 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the negligence of the Defendant vehicle driver, who neglected the Plaintiff’s duty of care and the duty of care on the front line, occurred concurrently, and it is reasonable to view that the negligence of the Defendant vehicle driver is 50%.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 863,810 won (1,727,630 won x 50%) and delay damages for the amount equivalent to 50% of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff to the plaintiff.

B. 1) Determination 1) In full view of the circumstances such as the 100% of the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the accident of this case is deemed to have occurred due to the negligence of the Plaintiff’s driver, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the evidence mentioned above and the evidence set forth in the Nos. 3 through 5 (including the serial number, taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings; and

At the time of the accident of this case, the progress of the plaintiff vehicle and the defendant vehicle are as follows.

① The front door of the new Switzerland apartment, ② the location of the accident in this case Ma1: The Plaintiff’s vehicle shall be the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

arrow