beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 27,236,748 with respect to the Plaintiff and the period from August 25, 2010 to July 16, 2015.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. Facts of recognition 1) Defendant B’s vehicle C at around 22:18 on August 25, 2010 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”)
2) On the other hand, the plaintiff who was driving the vehicle and proceeded along the three-lanes in front of the Seoul Southern-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (the opposite lane) by his own fault without properly checking the front section of the road while driving the road along one-lanes. On the crosswalk installed at the bend, the plaintiff who was crossing the road 2 meters away from the right side of the vehicle in front of the defendant's vehicle, was found later, and was shocked by the front part of the vehicle in front of the defendant's vehicle (hereinafter "the accident in this case").
(2) At the time of the instant accident, the signal signal at the crosswalk installed therein was a vehicle signal, and at the time of the accident, the Plaintiff was using a large amount of rain at the time, and the Plaintiff was using a friendly acid in the verification color system.
3) Defendant Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”).
) The insurer is an insurer which has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle (the fact that there is no dispute over grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 4, Gap evidence 3-1 to 6, Gap evidence 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
B. According to the fact of recognition of liability, Defendant B is the operator of the Defendant vehicle, and the Defendant Company is jointly and severally liable for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the instant accident as the insurer of the Defendant vehicle.
C. Determination as to the Defendants’ assertion of limitation of liability: Provided, however, at night when the Plaintiff gets off, the Plaintiff erred in governance of the five-lane pedestrian crossing in the face of the red signal, etc., and the Plaintiff’s mistake was caused by the occurrence and expansion of damages caused by the instant accident, and thus, the amount of damages to be compensated by the Defendants is determined.