(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.04 2019나37679

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.04 2019나37679

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the building E located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”), and the Defendant is the owner of the Fcar (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

B. On February 25, 2019, around 09:34, the instant accident occurred when the Defendant, while getting off the instant vehicle in order to park the instant vehicle at the instant parking lot, and the instant vehicle was damaged (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On the instant parking lot of the building, a cuter and floor with a studs are installed, and a driver who intends to park the vehicle places a stop with a studs with a studs, and parking is conducted in a way that the shuttles are automatically lowered upon completion of parking.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff asserted 1) The accident of this case occurred when the defendant was parked in the post-containr by cutting off the parking space from the floor area because it was again cut off without securing the parking space, due to neglecting his duty of care and failing to do so. Thus, the defendant asserts that the defendant has a duty to compensate the plaintiff for damages equivalent to 440,000 won for the repair cost of the shuttler damaged. 2) The defendant asserts that the accident of this case was caused by the shuttler even though the floor of this case did not deviate from the area of the shuttleer, and therefore, the accident of this case was caused by the sudden operation of the shuter.

B. Determination 1: (a) it is not sufficient to recognize the fact that the instant vehicle deviates from the floor area at the time of re-transfer due to the lack of parking space to secure the parking space; and (b) there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, Nos. 1 and 1.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2016.12.16 2016노3647

-서울서부지방법원 2015.02.11 2014고정1260

-서울서부지방법원 2015.09.11 2015노369

-대법원 1972. 4. 11. 선고 71다2165 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.29 2014나63673