beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 23,200,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from March 15, 2014 to April 15, 2014; and (b) the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On September 28, 2013, Nonparty A, around 02:48, driven a non-vehicle for business use (hereinafter “victim”) belonging to Youngnam-si Co., Ltd., Youngnam-si (hereinafter “Anon-party A”), which was parked in the direction of the right line, at the intersection in front of the Seo-gu, Seogu, Seo-gu, Busan, Busan (hereinafter “Smart vehicle”), and went through the right line beyond the median line, he/she conflicts with the E Smart (hereinafter “the damaged vehicle”) of the Do driving car (hereinafter “the instant accident”). Accordingly, the damaged vehicle was demolished and scrapped.
B. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with D, the owner of the damaged vehicle, and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator for the damaged vehicle.
C. On March 14, 2014, the Plaintiff paid D KRW 1,400,000 to D with insurance proceeds for the destruction of damaged vehicles due to the instant accident. On March 17, 2014, the Plaintiff recovered KRW 1,400,000 from the remainder after the scrapping of damaged vehicles.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. According to the above facts, the instant accident was caused by A’s invasion of the center line of the road opposite to the direction of the direction of the direction of the direction of the direction of the right of the right of the right of the right of the right of the right of the road during the course of the right of the right of the right of the right of the right of the road. Thus, the Defendant, a mutual aid business entity of the damaged vehicle, is
B. The Defendant’s assertion and determination on the limitation of liability were that D, the driver of the victimized vehicle, driven at the time of blood alcohol level of 0.023%, and was driving on the road at a rapid speed in violation of the signal at the intersection immediately before reaching the accident site.