beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 31,77,500 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from September 20, 2017 to October 30, 2018; and (b) the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with A and BMW vehicle owned by it (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the insurer who has entered into the automobile insurance contract with CNA vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).
B. On March 26, 2017, around 21:30, when driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and passing around the intersection of the 2 Sampong Library in Seopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopopo-si, D, a drinking condition, was an accident of collision with the Defendant’s vehicle driving from the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the intersection (hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. The Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 42,370,000 to A under the pretext of the repair cost, etc. of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 through 4, 6 through 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. According to the above facts and evidence, the accident in this case may be recognized as arising from the negligence of D driving the Defendant vehicle, and thus, the Defendant, the insurer of the Defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate for the damage incurred by the owner or driver of the Defendant vehicle, due to the accident in this case, to a third party.
Ultimately, the plaintiff who was damaged by the accident of this case shall be entitled to receive compensation for property damage A under Article 682 of the Commercial Act in subrogation of the right of the defendant who is the insurer of the defendant's vehicle.
B. However, the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the intersection in light of the degree of alcohol (0.151% of blood alcohol concentration) as the driver of the Defendant vehicle at the time of the instant accident, as well as the damaged part of the vehicle that entered the intersection, which can be known through the overall purport of the evidence and arguments, including the above facts and evidence as seen earlier, Gap’s evidence and evidence No. 5.