(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.28 2015가단5114060

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.28 2015가단5114060

손해배상(자)

Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 104,831,466 to Plaintiff A; (b) KRW 102,04,308 to Plaintiff B; and (c) from May 23, 2014 to January 2016 to Plaintiff B.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On May 23, 2014, at around 21:50 on May 23, 2014, C driving a DSM5 taxi, and went to the left in violation of the vehicle stop signal at the intersection of the race track distance in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, for a left-hand turn, and the front part of the FOtoba driven by E, in violation of the signal on the opposite side, was shocked toward the right side of the said taxi (hereinafter “instant accident”), and accordingly, E was treated in the hospital, and died of the throstal cerebr.

Plaintiff

A is the father of the network E (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), the plaintiff B is the mother of the deceased, and the defendant is the mutual aid operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with the above taxi driven by C.

[Evidence] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 9 and the purpose of the whole pleading

B. According to the above facts of recognition of liability, C is liable for the damages suffered by the deceased and the plaintiffs due to the instant accident, since C was driving the said taxi and caused the death of the deceased.

C. Inasmuch as the Deceased was found to have committed an error in contravention of the signal while driving the Oralb, the Defendant’s liability is limited to 55% by taking account of the error.

(45%) The Defendant asserted that the Defendant’s liability should be limited by taking account of the deceased’s failure to wear a safety cap at the time of the instant accident. However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the deceased did not wear a safety cap at the time of the instant accident, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently, the Defendant’s assertion on this part is rejected.

2. The current cost shall be calculated in accordance with the calculation method by the heading-man formula, which deducts intermediate interest at a simple interest rate of 5/12 per month of the scope of liability for damages, and any fraction of less than a month and less than a won for the convenience of the calculation shall be discarded.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 6, and

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.14 2014가단217400

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.26 2012가단300049

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.22 2014가단177700

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.26 2013가단116173

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.08 2014가단118527