logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.12.15 2019나90395
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff runs the freight forwarding business under the trade name of C, and the defendant runs the transportation business using the truck under the trade name of D.

B. On October 4, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant and three companies, including FF Co., Ltd., to transport 21 tons of steel products (hereinafter “the instant cargo”). On October 4, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with H (hereinafter “H”) with the Defendant to transport the instant cargo to KRW 550,000 (hereinafter “the instant transport contract”).

C. Around October 4, 2018, the Defendant started driving the instant cargo on the top of and around October 5, 2018, and arrived at H around 08:00 on the following day and unloaded the said cargo.

At the time of unloading the instant cargo, there was a large amount of rain due to the typhoon’s influence, but the instant cargo was lowered by H employees while the instant cargo was out of rain.

E. H received the instant cargo from the Plaintiff and issued a “certificate of acceptance”.

F. On the other hand, H filed a request for return of the instant cargo, asserting that the said steel products were damaged in return, immediately after the receipt of the instant cargo.

H. On October 31, 2018, E claimed KRW 17,008,150 for the payment of damages incurred by damage to the instant cargo, and the Plaintiff paid the said amount to E on June 28, 2019, and acquired the instant cargo.

F. Thereafter, on July 22, 2019, the Plaintiff disposed of the instant cargo in KRW 9,237,800 to I Co., Ltd.

[Reasons for Recognition] Class A, Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9 (including paper numbers), Evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion entered into a transport contract with the plaintiff, and the defendant breached his duty of care as a carrier while transporting the freight of this case, and thereby recorded the above freight in the whole.

arrow