beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 700,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from March 3, 201 to November 29, 201.
Reasons
1. Determination on the main claim
A. On March 3, 2010, at around 21:30, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) driven B vehicle (hereinafter the Plaintiff’s vehicle) and stopped in the direction of signal while driving on the road near the river basin located in the river basin in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b) the Defendant’s insured vehicle C (hereinafter the Defendant’s insured vehicle) was faced with an accident that shocks the back of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was stopped.
(hereinafter referred to as the “accident.” After the instant accident, the Plaintiff was diagnosed on March 5, 2010 as having discovered a hospital on March 5, 2010 and was diagnosed as an anti-months on the part of the slot department’s inside and outside of the slot department.
As a result, the Plaintiff suffered from injury, such as light and king salt, and half-month ionion on the side of the slives of the slives, etc., due to the instant accident, the Defendant, the insurer of the Defendant, is liable to preferentially compensate the Plaintiff for damages of KRW 30 million, which is part of the total amount of damages, such as the Plaintiff’s lost income, slive treatment expenses, future treatment expenses, consolation money, etc.
(The plaintiff does not specify specifically the amount of damages for each item). (b)
Judgment
On the other hand, there is no dispute between the parties as to the occurrence of the accident in this case and the details of the accident.
However, the statement of Gap evidence No. 1 alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff suffered bodily harm, such as anti-monthly stoke, etc. from the accident of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, the following circumstances, i.e., ① the road of this case was driven by the vehicle's body at the time, ② the vehicle that was driven by the vehicle's body, and ② the photograph of the defendant's vehicle immediately after the accident of this case, were taken.