(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.01.15 2018나111746

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) 대전지방법원 2019.01.15 2018나111746

구상금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurance business entity that entered into an automobile insurance contract for D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”) with C, and the Defendant is an insurance business entity that entered into an automobile insurance contract for E vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

B. On December 15, 2017, around 15:15, the Plaintiff’s vehicle driven on the secondary lane in front of a wooden intersection road in the vicinity of Ycheon-ri, 973-2, in the front of an official road. The Defendant’s vehicle was stopping over two lanes and their sides among the above roads. However, in this case, there was an accident that conflicts between the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the loaded part of the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

At the time, the above road was a straight line without any obstacle to view, and it was relatively wide in width.

C. By January 3, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,370,000 to C with the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

The committee for deliberation on car insurance disputes has decided to deliberate and coordinate that the negligence of the plaintiff's vehicle and the defendant's vehicle in relation to the accident of this case is "90: 10."

E. The Defendant paid the Defendant KRW 1,037,00,00, which is 10% of the above insurance money as indemnity according to the above deliberation and resolution.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1 through 9, Eul's evidence 1-12, and the purport of whole pleading

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was at least 40% of the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle in relation to the instant accident, which was parked in two lanes in order to use the cell phone without any reason at the time of the instant accident or in order to use the cellular phone.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 3,11,000,00, excluding the money already paid (1,037,000) from the portion equivalent to the ratio of negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle (40%) out of the above insurance money as indemnity to the Plaintiff.

3. According to the above facts of recognition, the instant accident was negligent in performing the duty of Jeonju as a whole.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2021.02.04 2020나74771

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.16 2017나11482

-대전지방법원 2018.05.15 2017나109319

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.23 2017나74575

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.25 2017나91228