logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.11.23 2016나64944
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

D. A gas station located in Pyeongtaek-si B at around 09:30 on May 4, 2015.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter referred to as “D vehicle”), and the Defendant is the operator of the C gas station in Pyeongtaek-si B.

B. Around 09:30 on May 4, 2015, the driver of the instant vehicle: (a) went into the Automatic Vehicle installed in the gas station in the instant C (hereinafter “instant Automatic Vehicle”); (b) and (c) caused the negligence of wrong operation of the vehicle while driving the vehicle, the driver of the instant vehicle shocked the inside of the instant Automatic Vehicle; (b) thereby, the instant Automatic Vehicle was destroyed.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

Around November 2014, the Defendant purchased the instant automatic rent amounting to KRW 223,30,000 (including value-added tax) from E (hereinafter “E”) and completed the installation of the instant automatic rent period on or around December 2014 following the installation period of approximately one month. The Defendant operated the instant automatic rent period from January 2015.

After the instant accident, the Defendant requested E to repair the instant automatic washing machine, and E submitted a written estimate, which is a sum of KRW 49,339,556 (excluding value-added tax), on May 6, 2015, and completed the repair of the instant automatic washing machine from May 13, 2015 to May 16, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 13, part of witness F of the court of first instance, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above recognition of the occurrence of liability for damages, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff as an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to a marine automobile.

3. Scope of liability for damages

A. According to the result of the appraiser G in the first instance court’s appraisal of repair costs, according to the result of the fact-finding about G in the first instance court, the damage equivalent to the repair cost of the instant automatic assessment period due to the instant accident is KRW 9.2 million.

As to this, the defendant is an accident of this case.

arrow