beta
Text
1. Compensation for an accident described in the separate sheet against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. On May 3, 2010, Nonparty B driven a D 130 motor vehicle owned by Nonparty C (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) from the Madi30 motor vehicle from Madung-dong, Madung-dong, Madung-si, Madung-si, Madung-si (hereinafter “the instant motor vehicle”). While Nonparty B got off the Defendant’s E-wheeled Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “the instant two-wheeled Motor Vehicle”) who had entered the intersection with no signal signal, from the e-maild ground from the Madung-dong to the Madung-dong, the fact that the Plaintiff was the insurer who concluded a comprehensive insurance contract with Nonparty C for the instant motor vehicle, together with evidence Nos. 1 to 3, evidence Nos. 1, 2-1 to 4, evidence Nos. 1 to 5-1, 3-1 to 6-14, evidence No. 71, evidence No. 5-1 and evidence No. 7, 5-1 to 5-1, evidence No.
B. According to the above facts of recognition of liability, in entering the intersection where no signal, etc. is available due to driving of the instant vehicle by driving the instant vehicle, B was negligent in neglecting the duty of care to prevent an accident by properly examining the right and the right before entering the intersection, and such mistake in B caused the instant accident and the occurrence of damage.
Therefore, the Plaintiff, the insurer of the instant automobile, is liable to compensate the Defendant for the damages incurred by the instant accident.
C. The limitation of liability, however, is reasonable to limit the Plaintiff’s responsibility to 75% in consideration of the circumstances of the instant accident and the various circumstances revealed in the pleadings of the instant case, including the fact that the Defendant and the Defendant had the duty to well take into account the right and the right after entering the intersection without signal, etc.
2. Scope of liability for damages
A. The Defendant’s loss objection.