logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.27 2018나17586
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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into an automobile mutual aid contract with respect to B (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. At around 19:00 on September 5, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle, while proceeding to a three-lane road near the Sloping road in the vicinity of the Sloping-gu, Seoyang-gu, Mangsan-si, Mansan-si, a three-lane, a three-lane exclusive for the right ofpass, tried to enter the two-lanes of the immediately preceding crosswalk, but without having entered the two-lanes due to the lack of space, was going to a two-lane and a two-lane, without entering the two-lane.

On the other hand, the defendant's vehicle is running along the three-lanes of the above road and stops at a three-lane, and the space is insufficient due to the plaintiff's vehicle that stops at a three-lane, and the side side of the plaintiff's vehicle was shocked on the right side of the plaintiff's vehicle.

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

On October 23, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 535,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5, Eul's 1, the purport of the whole statement or video, or pleading

2. The Defendant asserts that the instant lawsuit is unlawful, since the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit without going through a dispute settlement procedure under a mutual agreement on the deliberation of the dispute over reimbursement of automobile insurance (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

However, the instant agreement was concluded for the settlement of disputes between non-life insurers, etc. in a simple, speedy and economic way. However, it appears that the Plaintiff would rather be contrary to the purport of the agreement to dismiss the claim and take the procedure for requesting deliberation from the beginning in the event that the agreement company filed a lawsuit in violation of the duty of transfer.

arrow