logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.18 2015나17875
구상금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid additionally shall be revoked.

Reasons

1.The following facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings at Gap evidence 1 to 5, 7, 8 (including numbers for each item; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul evidence 1 to 2 or video.

The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to Ai30 Passenger Vehicles (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has concluded a car mutual aid contract with respect to BNF stations and other taxi (hereinafter referred to as Defendant taxi).

B. Around 19:53 on July 23, 2013, the driver of Defendant taxi stopped the four-lanes of the four-lane road (hereinafter “road”) in front of the gas station located in Daejeon U.S., along the designated bus stops between the four-lanes in front of the gas station in Daejeon Seo-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant road”) and the bus stops again along the three-lanes of the said road while departing from the said road, and the driver of Defendant taxi shocked the part on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was bypassing the right side of the said vehicle to enter the said gas station.

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

On March 4, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,120,230 in total as insurance money for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

2. Assertion and determination

A. The plaintiff asserted that the accident of this case occurred due to the unilateral negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle who entered the oil station in front of the defendant taxi, because the defendant taxi stops illegally over the fourth lane of the road of this case and the bus stops at the bus stops without violating the duty of the right and the duty of the right and the duty of the right and the duty of the right and the right to claim compensation for the total amount of the insurance money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant who is the mutual aid business operator of the defendant vehicle and the damages for delay.

On the other hand, the defendant could not expect the move of the defendant-si that started after getting the passenger to get off the accident of this case.

arrow