beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below is revoked.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
The plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to Blue Vehicles (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff Vehicles"), and the defendant is the owner of Clue Pool Vehicles (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant Vehicles").
Around 17:55 on May 15, 2016, the Defendant’s vehicle entered the 347 new-dong apartment as the village of Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, and parked in the parking zone in front of the said apartment 11.
(C) Around 20:43 of the same day, the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the apartment, following the Defendant’s vehicle, entered the apartment, and the said taxi continued to run along the Defendant’s vehicle, following the Defendant’s parking zone and the passage of the vehicle (hereinafter “victim”). On the one hand, the Defendant’s vehicle was parked along the Ebenz vehicle (hereinafter “victim”). On the other hand, the vehicle parked along the Defendant’s vehicle and the damaged vehicle, at the same time, parked along the passage between the Defendant’s vehicle and the damaged vehicle. On the other hand, the vehicle was parked along the damaged vehicle in a direct angle direction.
(S) On the same day, the Defendant tried to drive the Defendant’s vehicle again at around 21:10 on the same day, but, due to the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked, it was difficult for the Defendant to get out of the parking zone and move the Plaintiff’s vehicle behind the vehicle in order to secure the course. In this case, there was an accident that conflicts with the damaged vehicle in the parking zone while the Plaintiff’s vehicle is pushed ahead in the future.
On May 23, 2016, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 1,179,820 as compensation for the damage of the damaged vehicle.
【As a result of the commission of document forwarding to the Seoul Yongsan Police Station, the defendant is obliged to compensate for damages in accordance with the above-mentioned facts, even if it was necessary to transport the plaintiff vehicle in order to secure its course, the defendant is required to pay attention so that the plaintiff vehicle does not conflict with other vehicles even if it was necessary to transport the plaintiff vehicle to secure its course.