logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.03.27 2017나64271
구상금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the following additional payment order shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On June 29, 2016, around 20:10, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was proceeding along the two-lane distance from the direction direction of the Triririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririririly from the direction of the two-lane road. However, while the Defendant’s vehicle, from the one-lane road in the opposite direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s left upper part of the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle, the front part of the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle, which was the front part of the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

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

On October 4, 2016, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 16,500,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, 5, Gap evidence 2 and 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 6-1 through 5, Eul evidence 1-1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The following circumstances are: (a) at the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was passing through a three-distance intersection in accordance with the straight line, and the Defendant’s vehicle attempted to turn to the left at the time of the instant accident without properly verifying the progress although the Plaintiff’s vehicle was going through one lane in the opposite direction; (b) the Plaintiff’s driver attempted to turn to the left without properly verifying the situation; (c) the shock of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is the front door of the left part; and (d) the shock part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is the front door of the left part; and (e) the shock part of the Defendant’s vehicle is the front door of the left part; and (e) the shock part of the Defendant’s vehicle is the front door of the left part; and (e) the instant accident occurred at the time of the Plaintiff’s vehicle passing through the said intersection.

arrow