logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.05 2019나73569
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 an automobile insurance contract with C vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with D vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On April 14, 2017, around 09:18, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was stopped at the intersection in front of the distance of the article article 8 Dong-dong, Nam-gu, Incheon, Nam-gu, Incheon, and the Defendant’s vehicle, which was subsequently driven, was an accident of drilling the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the rear.

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

On February 22, 2019, the Plaintiff paid the total of KRW 1,485,00 (including KRW 200,000 of the self-paid premium) with the repair cost, etc. of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident as insurance money.

1) The Plaintiff asserted that the instant accident was caused by the total negligence of the Defendant’s driver, and filed a claim against the Defendant for the dispute deliberation committee for reimbursement under the said mutual agreement, based on the mutual agreement on the deliberation of the car insurance dispute, and the committee for deliberation on reimbursement claims decided to deliberate and resolve the amount of liability of the Defendant’s driver as 90% in the occurrence of the instant accident. (2) Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the said decision on deliberation and resolution.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1 through 4, Eul evidence 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances that can be acknowledged by adding the evidence and the overall purport of the pleadings as seen earlier in the above basic facts, namely, the instant accident is a post-fluort incident, and in spite of the duty to reduce the speed at the vicinity of the intersection and to secure a sufficient safety distance with the preceding vehicle, it appears that the driver of the vehicle, who is the vehicle, is the main fault of the vehicle, after neglecting to do so. However, the damage level and the final end of the original and the Defendant vehicle.

arrow