logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.04.23 2019나62927
구상금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

At the time of the accident, the defendant vehicle CD at the time of the accident, around 21:20 on December 19, 2018 at the time of the accident, the defendant vehicle passed through the opposite intersection and attempted to change the lanes from three lanes to four lanes at the time of the collision between the opposite intersection and the opposite intersection, and the plaintiff vehicle at the time of the accident was paid the insurance proceeds of the collision and 5,946,000 won 5,00,000,000,000,000

1. The circumstances leading to the instant accident are as follows.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident of this case occurred due to the previous negligence of the defendant vehicle's rapid change in the zone where the change of the lane is prohibited while the plaintiff vehicle was at the right time after the vehicle was at the right time.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the defendant's vehicle has been negligent on the part of the plaintiff's vehicle who did not pay attention to the moving-way vehicle while entering the moving-way line as the direction direction, etc. at the point where the place where prohibition of change of course is terminated.

B. The following circumstances, which can be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the evidence and the overall purport of arguments as mentioned above, which are large cargo vehicles with about 10 meters in the body length, the defendant vehicle passes through the above large intersection as a three-lane of the four-lane and rapidly changed the lane from the safety zone to the four-lane of the end line to the four-lane of the end line. The plaintiff vehicle entered the four-lane of the right line and was under normal direct control by entering the four-lane of the right line. The plaintiff vehicle is parked on the right side of the four-lane of the right side at the time, and it seems that the defendant vehicle could not avoid the defendant vehicle, and the accident circumstance and the degree of conflict, degree of shock, etc. recorded in the record.

arrow