logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.02.09 2017가단5043063
손해배상(자)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 14,937,455 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from November 22, 2014 to February 9, 2018.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) B is a bus C at around 12:20 on November 22, 2014 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

(i)In order to avoid conjection with the vehicle driven earlier while driving the front road of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government along the three-lane distance from the center of consideration to the front road, while driving along the three-lane distance from the center of consideration, the E-motor vehicle (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff vehicle") which was parked in four-lanes on the right side of the vehicle at the end of the end of the four-lane.

(A) The part of the driver’s seat even is shocked to the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the body of the Plaintiff, who was on duty in the rear side of the Plaintiff’s driver’s seat, fell between two vehicles (hereinafter “instant accident”).

2) As a result of the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered injuries, such as duplicating pelf, damage to the pelfus, and pelfus pelfus at the left-hand side.

3 The defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement for the defendant vehicle.

B. According to the above findings of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff as a mutual aid business operator of defendant vehicle.

C. According to Article 32 subparagraph 2 of the Road Traffic Act limiting liability, no driver of any motor vehicle shall stop or park the motor vehicle at the edge of an intersection or at a place within five meters from the corner of a road.

The accident location of this case constitutes a place within five meters from the corner of the road, but on the other hand, the yellow line, which is a traffic safety facility prohibiting only parking, was marked. It cannot be said that the plaintiff's stopping of the plaintiff's vehicle at the above place violates the law.

However, even if the plaintiff is also at all times, he/she is at fault, unless he/she is working on a road on which the passage of a vehicle is frequent, and even if he/she is obliged to stop on the road where the passage of the vehicle is frequent, or to work safely.

arrow