beta
Text
The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to Plaintiff A for KRW 377,360 and for this, KRW 5% per annum from October 25, 2018 to November 4, 2020.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 25, 2018, the vehicle driven by the Plaintiff A conflicts with the vehicle driven by the Defendant C in Sejong Special Self-Governing City on October 16:35, 2018.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)
Plaintiff
A suffered injuries, such as salt, tension, impairment of sponsed sphere of sphere, sphere of sphere, sphere, and tension, due to the instant accident.
C. Vehicles driven by Defendant C at the time of the instant accident are owned by Defendant D.
Plaintiff
B is the spouse of the plaintiff A.
[Based on recognition] Items A 1 through 5, 7 (including branch numbers in case of additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. Since the accident of this case occurred by Defendant C’s negligence, Defendant C was injured by Plaintiff A, as a tort, Defendant C is jointly and severally liable for damages to the Plaintiffs as the owner of the vehicle driven by Defendant C under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act.
Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to Plaintiff A the amount of KRW 8,471,00 (i.e., the amount of KRW 3,000,000 for future treatment among active damages of KRW 471,00 for future treatment expenses), KRW 1,250,00 for consolation money, and damages for delay to Plaintiff B.
B. According to the above facts, Defendant C is a tortfeasor who caused the instant accident, and Defendant D is jointly and severally liable for damages arising from the instant accident as an operator of a vehicle driven by Defendant C under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act.
However, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, Plaintiff A was negligent in violating the duty of care at the time of the instant accident, and Plaintiff A’s above negligence is deemed to have caused the instant accident.
Accordingly, in full view of all the circumstances shown in the argument of this case, the negligence ratio of Plaintiff A is 20%.