(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.01.18 2016나10214

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.01.18 2016나10214

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

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who runs a mutual aid business with B and C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) to compensate for the damage incurred during the possession, management, and use of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement with D vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”), and A is the owner of E vehicles (hereinafter “Nonindicted vehicles”).

B. On October 2, 2015, at around 21:25, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driving along the front road of the Daegu East-gu, Daegu-gu, along two lanes. The Nonparty and the Defendant’s vehicle, prior to the Plaintiff’s vehicle, were driving along the same direction in sequence.

C. The Defendant’s vehicle entered the two-lanes by reporting that the preceding Non-Party vehicle operates, turning on the right direction, etc., and also turning on the right direction, etc., and entered the two-lanes.

The defendant vehicle maintained the distance with the plaintiff vehicle driving along the two lanes and entered the two lanes safely. However, while the non-party vehicle entered the two lanes in front of the defendant vehicle, the vehicle operated the two lanes between the first and the second lanes in the way in which the non-party vehicle entered the two lanes in front of the defendant vehicle, and the defendant vehicle operated the two lanes in order to avoid the conflict with the non-party vehicle.

E. The non-party vehicle and the Defendant vehicle did not conflict, but due to the operation of the Defendant vehicle, the Plaintiff vehicle, which was followed by the Defendant vehicle, was shocked by the front part of the vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”).

F. The Plaintiff paid KRW 1,102,070 to the taxi passengers who were on board the Plaintiff’s vehicle with medical expenses and the agreed amount.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The defendant vehicle in the plaintiff's assertion is a front and rear vehicle, and the front and rear vehicle is to be changed.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.25 2017나86912

-서울남부지방법원 2020.08.20 2019나65861

-서울남부지방법원 2016.12.22 2016나59131

-전주지방법원 2016.08.11 2015나7643

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.24 2017나3740