logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.30 2018나68034
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 circumstances leading to the instant accident are as follows.

At the time of the accident, the insured vehicle of the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”).

Defendant Insured Vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Vehicle”)

CD Temporary 17:01 on July 20, 2017, 17:01, the same shall apply to the summary map in attached Form 2 to the situation of collision at the intersection of the E apartment in the direction of the Sinung-gu E apartment.

Amount of insurance proceeds paid 4,457,000 won as security for self-employed person insured against self-employed person [based on recognition] 50,000 won, without any dispute, Gap's evidence 1 through 6, Eul's statements and images, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the fact of the negligence ratio of the plaintiff vehicle and the driver of the defendant vehicle, the background of the accident shown in the records, the degree of conflict and shock, and the overall purport of the evidence evidence as seen earlier, it is reasonable to view the negligence ratio of the plaintiff vehicle and the driver of the defendant vehicle as 10: 90.

① At the accident site of this case, signal apparatus is installed as an intersection in the form of a road that enters the fixed door of the apartment unit E in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-gu.

② The Plaintiff’s vehicle had been proceeding along the two-lanes of the front side of the said apartment, and the Defendant’s vehicle, while making a left turn to the left in order to enter the said apartment from a one-lane to the front side of the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, had the front side of the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

③ In the above case, the defendant vehicle violated the traffic conditions of the opposite direction while making a left-hand turn, and in particular, even though the vehicle runs slowly at a narrow distance on the opposite direction, the accident of this case occurred due to the negligence of trying to turn to the left-hand turn, and the above negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle is the main factor of the occurrence of the accident of this case.

(4) Provided, That it shall be

arrow