logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.24 2017나44215
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

Plaintiff

On October 1, 2016, when the driver of the vehicle operates the plaintiff vehicle in the e-mail parking lot in Gangseo-dong, Gangnam-gu, Yeung-si on October 1, 2016, the part concerning the left side side of the defendant vehicle, which passed through the right side of the plaintiff vehicle, is conflicting with the part concerning the right side of the plaintiff vehicle while driving the plaintiff vehicle on the left side between the parking area.

On November 25, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 594,000 in total as the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Evidence Nos. 1 to 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings as above, namely, ① the place of accident is located in the marina parking lot; ② the width of the passage between the parking zone is somewhat narrow; ② the Plaintiff’s vehicle is driving along the vehicle according to the left side of the passage through which the Defendant’s vehicle stops and drives the steering gear on the right side (which seems to have been in the parking zone on the left side of the passage), and ③ the Defendant’s vehicle is driving along the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle at a rapid speed, and conflict with the Plaintiff’s vehicle. In full view of the following circumstances, the instant accident ought to take into account: (a) the driver’s negligence of the Defendant vehicle who violated the duty to safely drive the vehicle by driving the vehicle on the front side of the vehicle in the parking zone; and (b) the driver’s negligence on the part of the Defendant vehicle is anticipated to pass the vehicle by driving the vehicle on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle; and (c) the Plaintiff’s driver’s negligence on the part of the vehicle.

arrow