beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual 5% from December 19, 2013 to November 3, 2017, and the following.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. On December 19, 2013, around 22:40 on December 19, 2013, 1) 22:3 (the Plaintiff is owned by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) Ma3 (the Plaintiff’s vehicle hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) on the front right-hand part of Ma3 (the Plaintiff’s vehicle hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff’s vehicle”) on the front right-hand side of Ma-1 vehicle, which was parked along the two-lane, was parked along the soundproof-2 vehicle, with soundproof-1, with soundproof-2 vehicle in front of Ma-1 vehicle and turned the two-lane vehicle into the front right-hand side of Ma1 vehicle, and Ma3 (the Plaintiff’s vehicle is on the front right-hand side of Ma2 vehicle) on the vehicle in front of the Plaintiff’s son D while stopping.
(hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”). 3) Afterward Ma4 vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).
(ii) this Ma-3 Vehicle shocked the rear part of the vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”) and as described in Appendix 2.
(4) The instant accident site road is a national highway with a limited speed of 70 km, where the passage of ordinary vehicles is frequent, and it was very difficult for the Plaintiff, who was on the top of the operation of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, to have been on the top of the operation of the driver’s vehicle. The instant accident site was a road with a limited speed of 70 km, and the traffic of ordinary vehicles was frequently frequent. The site around the accident site was a flat straight line, a road, or a road with a surface, and it was very low at night.
5) The Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with the Defendant’s vehicle. [The fact that there is no dispute over grounds for recognition, Gap 1-4, 6, 18 evidence, the purport of the entire pleadings.]
B. According to the facts of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff as an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the defendant's automobile.
C. However, as seen earlier, as D, is the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, it is intended to prevent the negligence caused prior accidents prior to the instant accident, and the subsequent accident.