beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 4,411,663 to the Plaintiff, as well as 5% per annum from September 23, 2012 to March 22, 2017.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, unless there is a dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the whole pleadings:
On September 23, 2012, at around 08:00, the Defendant driven a Cpoter vehicle on September 23, 2012, and proceeded forward to the left of the Epoart road in front of the Epoet D from the area of the Hetictal distance to the area of the future second apartment room, and entered the said Epoet parking lot. While the said road was directly located in the area of the second apartment room in the future, the Defendant caused an accident that led the Plaintiff’s driver’s previous operation to the area of the Hetictal distance to the area of the Hetictal distance.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.
In the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered injuries caused by abandonment of the right-hand burgical burgical burgical flag, which requires treatment for about eight weeks.
2. Judgment on the main defense of this case
A. On November 21, 2012, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant lawsuit ought to be dismissed, as the Plaintiff and the Defendant reached an agreement to bring an action against the instant accident.
B. In a case where the content of a contract is written between the parties to the contract as a disposal document, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, the existence and content of the expression should be recognized unless there are special circumstances. However, in a case where the objective meaning of the text is not clearly expressed, regardless of the parties’ internal intent, the contents of the text and the motive and circumstances leading up to the conclusion of the contract, the purpose and genuine intent to be achieved by the parties to the contract, transaction practices, etc. shall be comprehensively taken into account, and the contents of the contract shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules, general common sense, and transaction norms so as to conform to the ideology of social justice and equity. In particular, when one party claims the content of the contract imposes significant responsibility on the other party or its ownership.