beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
Around March 2014, the Plaintiff entered into an entrustment management contract with B on the cargo vehicles for Pyeongtaek (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff vehicles”) and thereafter is a corporation that owns the Plaintiff vehicles from that time to that time.
(Evidence Nos. 1 through 3). The Defendant is an insurance company that entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with D with respect to the Efranchising vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”). From January 14, 2014 to January 14, 2015, with respect to the insurance period.
(B) Around 18:50 on November 17, 2014, D driven the Defendant’s vehicle and entered the said section into the primary U.S. road located in Echeon-si, the Defendant’s driver’s seat in the primary line of the same road (hereinafter “instant accident”) caused an accident corresponding to the front front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in H driving, which was driven by the Defendant’s driver’s seat in the primary line of the same road.
On December 3, 2014, the Defendant agreed to pay the amount of KRW 17,600,000 (hereinafter “the instant insurance proceeds”) to J as the total amount of damages for physical damage of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the instant accident between J and J, with the name of “I,” where the same place of business as the Plaintiff’s domicile (place of business, location of its principal office, and location) is located. At that time, the Defendant paid the said insurance proceeds to J.
(B) 3. [Evidence A] without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 3-1, and Eul evidence 3-2, the defendant's occurrence of damages liability for damages and the limitation on liability as to the whole purport of the pleadings, and the facts of recognition of the whole purport of the arguments as to the limitation on liability. In other words, the accident in this case is a serious accident with the plaintiff's vehicle that was proceeding from the second line to the first line for U-turn, and the shock part of the defendant's vehicle is driving seat.