beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 104,961,790 with respect to the Plaintiff and the period from December 30, 2016 to February 22, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurance company that entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract between March 5, 2016 and March 5, 2017 with respect to a motor vehicle for B investment vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”).
B. At around 20:50 on April 6, 2016, A driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle, such as the description and image of the Accident Site Map, and made a left turn to the left in accordance with the left turn turn from the front line of the Busan Bank Station, which is located in the front line of the Busan Bank Station, to the front line of the Busan Bank Station, and the network C (hereinafter referred to as “the network”) driven from the front line to the front line of the front line in the front line of the Busan Bank Station, along with one lane, at the front line of the Busan Bank Station, and the network C (hereinafter referred to as “the network”) driven from the front line to the front line of the road, and driven the above intersection from the front line to the front line of the road, while walking the road at the front line of the road at the front line (on the front line of the road, there was a sign indicating that it is possible to the front line and the pedestrian signalton at the front line).
(hereinafter “instant traffic accident”). The accident site map
C. In the instant traffic accident, the Deceased died on May 29, 2016, while receiving treatment by suffering bodily injury, such as duball, etc., and the Plaintiff paid 146,506,570 won in total as the deceased’s medical expenses and damages to his bereaved family until December 29, 2016, and 440,000 won in repair expenses to the owner of the damaged Ortoa, respectively.
The defendant Busan Metropolitan City is a management agency of roads and ancillary facilities which are accident sites, and the Busan Metropolitan Police Agency under the jurisdiction of the defendant is an agency entrusted with the management of signal apparatus, etc. located in accident sites pursuant to Article 86 (1) of the Enforcement Decree
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 4, 5, Eul evidence and video Nos. 1 through 3 (including branch numbers, if any), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' arguments.