(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.02.09 2017나25354

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) 서울동부지방법원 2018.02.09 2017나25354

구상금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants ordering payment in excess of the amount ordered below.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an association established with a person holding a private taxi transportation business license in Seoul Special Metropolitan City as its members, and is conducting the business of compensating for the damages and losses (referring to a personal body accident) caused by an accident during the period of possession, use, and management of the vehicle by the ordinary members.

B. B is the owner of a private taxi (hereinafter “Plaintiff taxi”) and is the Plaintiff’s member of the Plaintiff’s association.

C. Defendant A is the driver of the D-car (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”), and Defendant E-Tech Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is the owner of the Defendant vehicle.

On July 14, 2016, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 15,010,000 by subrogation to a car maintenance business entity that repaired Plaintiff taxi as follows.

On June 7, 2016, the date and time of the accident: around 00:18, the area of the accident: 181 Han new apartment-distance accident at the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Sungnam-si: Defendant vehicle, which is located in 181, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Sungnam-si, is driving at a speed of 60 km from 4 lanes to west-gu, from the west-gu, the distance between the two-lanes, and tried to change the vehicle at three lanes in order to avoid the Plaintiff taxi parked at the 4-lane in the front direction, but it is proceeding at the 3-lane, and the back part of the Plaintiff taxi was received as the front driver's part of the vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the "accident in this case"), and the part of the E-car that continuously stops in the front section of the Plaintiff taxi with the rear part of the E-car that was driven in the front section of the Defendant taxi.

(hereinafter referred to as “the follow-up accident of this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including Serial Nos. 1) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2018.05.11 2018나30393

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.10 2017나28565

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.14 2016나32574

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.20 2017나26033

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.14 2014나48599