logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.16 2016나30011
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The key issue of this case is whether the collision accident of this case occurred while towing the towing vehicle (Defendant B's towing vehicle) or whether or not the towing vehicle (the plaintiff's assertion) was shocked by the towing vehicle (the towing vehicle's one ton of the towing vehicle of the defendant A) being driven independently by the insured vehicle (the defendant's assertion). The reason why this court should explain is as follows, except for the case's height of the contents as stated below, it is identical to the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The first instance court's decision Nos. 4, 11, and 13 are as follows.

The instant accident is reasonable to deem that the towing device was destroyed by shock in the state where the towing device was installed (the towing device is in the state when the towing device is not being towed. It is connected to the towing device. It is not shocked in the attached Form 2) but the towing device was installed in the state where the towing device was installed (the towing vehicle is being towed by breaking down, and see the attached Form 1 and the lower part of the attached Form 3).

This is because, if the towing device of towing vehicle at the time of the accident of this case was faced with the towing vehicle at the time of the accident of this case, there is no phenomenon that the boom boom boom and the steel board structure on the left and right side of towing vehicle cannot be damaged due to the shock, but the towing vehicle of this case caused damage to the steel board structure on the left and right side of towing vehicle due to the accident of this case.

(See Attached 1 Photographs). 2. Therefore, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and all appeals by the Defendants are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow