beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of an accident;
(a) Date and time of an accident: At around 12:00 on July 23, 2015;
(b) Accident point: the left edge of the flat road near the cafeteria of Daejeon Pream-gu C;
C. The circumstances leading up to the accident: The Defendant driven a motor vehicle in the instant case (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) and parked the motor vehicle at the location of the accident without taking out the situation, and then the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff was 83 years of age at the time of the accident) was waiting to get out of the front seat while the vehicle was waiting to get out of the front seat of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).
As a result of the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered from the injury of Section 1 of pulverization of the electronic bulvers to the right.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant vehicle was driven out of the instant vehicle, and the instant accident was caused by the operation of the instant vehicle. The instant accident is an accident caused by the instant vehicle. Even if the instant vehicle was not in the state of driving, it also includes the use of various auxiliary devices, such as opening a door at the front and rear stage of driving, and closing the door in the state of stopping. Therefore, the instant accident that occurred to passengers during the vehicle constitutes “accident caused by the operation of the vehicle.”
The Defendant, who is a driver of the instant vehicle, is liable for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the instant accident.
B. 1) First of all, as to whether the Plaintiff moved the instant vehicle when he was on board the instant vehicle, the Plaintiff’s statement No. 1-5 as evidence that corresponds to the fact that the instant vehicle was on board the vehicle at the time (it is difficult to believe that there was the Plaintiff’s statement in the statement against the Plaintiff, but it is difficult to view it in light of other evidence, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the said fact.
Rather, Section 1-9.