logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.12.03 2015나11783
구상금
Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Defendant A’s 7,237,800 won and among them 5,790.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 2, 2013, the Plaintiff concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Plaintiff’s vehicle B and C (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) with the insurance period from October 2, 2013 to October 2, 2014. Defendant Samsung Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. is the insurer of the automobile insurance contract with respect to the two-wheeled automobile operated by Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant Oba”).

B. At around 10:20 on April 24, 2014, Defendant A driven the Defendant Oral Ba and proceeded with a Sectoral Intersection from the coscopic area, Defendant A, who was on the top of a restaurant in the luscopic City E, scoped the central line, and fluscoped the front left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving on the opposite line, and fluscoped the front left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving on the opposite line.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On May 10, 2014, immediately after the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle used street trees and buildings adjacent to the road outside of the second line and stopped, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,237,800 to the Plaintiff’s vehicle for repair expenses, etc.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the accident of this case occurred due to Defendant Oral Ba infying central line, and as Defendant Oral Ba could not have predicted or avoided the accident, the accident occurred entirely due to Defendant Oral Ba's negligence, and the defendants jointly claim that the plaintiff who acquired the right of subrogation of the insurer should pay the insurance proceeds paid to the plaintiff with respect to the accident of this case.

3. Determination

A. Generally, the driver of a motor vehicle operating a road with a median line along his/her own bus line is common to believe that the motor vehicle coming from marina line is operated in compliance with the tea line. Thus, the other motor vehicle is the center line of the road.

arrow