(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.12.02 2016나6030 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.12.02 2016나6030

손해배상(기) 등

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of C vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), and the Defendant is the owner of D vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. Around 21:00 on September 8, 2015, the Defendant’s wife 264, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Sungnam-si, Seo-dong, and was standing on the road front of the bus stops for active airport buses, and the Defendant’s wife shocked the back part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was parked in front of the front end of the Defendant’s vehicle, due to the number of fishing operation.

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

Due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was exempted from part of the lower part of the shoulder, and the white paint of the Defendant’s vehicle was infected.

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

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff suffered damages of KRW 1,483,90,00 in total, KRW 144,00 in the vehicle repair period, KRW 144,00 in the color of KRW 790,00 in the vehicle repair period, and KRW 2,417,90 in the color to meet the difference after the replacement of the driver due to the instant accident. Of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 500,00 in the damages recognized by the Defendant on the conciliation date, and damages for delay.

B. In light of the above facts, the accident in this case occurred by the Defendant’s vehicle, which was under the stop, by shocking the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the operational failure, and the degree of shock is deemed to be minor due to the low speed of the vehicle, and the accident in this case appears to have occurred only to minor damage to the small size of the rear gate, and the restoration of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s damaged part’s damaged part of the vehicle is deemed to be sufficient only by painting.

Therefore, the color cost is to meet the color difference after the spread, replacement, and replacement of a panion.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2015.03.26 2014나34079

-서울남부지방법원 2018.05.17 2017나64819

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.06.21 2018나55731

-광주지방법원 2016.10.18 2016가단14152

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.04 2017나86