beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 2,507,925 against the defendant and 5% per annum from March 30, 2016 to September 20, 2017.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), respectively, with respect to the vehicle B (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).
B. On February 2, 2016, around 08:12, 2016, the Defendant’s vehicle was damaged by shocking the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was going to the left to the left at the intersection of the above road and Twit-ro (section 1 lanes) from the front 136-dong, Seo-dong, Seo-gu, Seonam-si, Sungnam-si to the intersection of the above road and Twit-do (section 2 lanes).
C. On March 29, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,950,500 of the insurance proceeds from the instant accident to the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6, Gap evidence 7-2, Eul evidence 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, the driver of the defendant vehicle who was trying to enter the right to the left at the intersection in the narrow width, was obligated to yield the course to the plaintiff vehicle who is going to the intersection (see Article 26(2) and (4) of the Road Traffic Act). Thus, the accident of this case occurred in violation of this, and thus, the defendant is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, and unless there are any special circumstances, is obliged to pay the indemnity to the plaintiff who acquired the right to indemnity under Article 682 of the Commercial Act.
B. However, according to the above evidence, the location where the accident in this case occurred is Twit-type intersection with yellow on-and-off signal, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle was in progress at the two-lane two-lane one way. When the vehicle in this case stops on the two-lane, the vehicle stopped on the two-lane as above, and it is incomplete to secure the view of the front door. The driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, while driving slowly, has a duty to prevent the accident by driving safely while closely driving the front door.