logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.19 2016나35993
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On September 14, 2014, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle: (a) while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the intersection near the Jinbuk-dong, the wife of the Gyeonggi-do, and driving the two-lane, the Plaintiff was shocking the Defendant’s vehicle going directly through the instant intersection from the right-hand lane.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,518,650 insurance money to the Plaintiff’s driver at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

Since then, as a dispute arises between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the instant accident, the Plaintiff and the Defendant filed a request for deliberation with the Deliberation Committee on Disputes over Claim for Compensation for Automobile Insurance (hereinafter “Deliberation Committee”), which decided on July 27, 2015 that the ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s liability to the instant accident is 65% and 35% of the Defendant’s vehicle’s liability ratio.

(hereinafter “Deliberation and Determination of this case”). E

Accordingly, on August 20, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for reimbursement against the Seoul Central District Court 2015Da651625 (hereinafter “instant previous suit”), but the instant previous suit was dismissed in accordance with the Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff did not file a lawsuit within 14 days from the date on which the Plaintiff was served with the deliberation and resolution of the instant case, and the judgment of the previous suit became final and conclusive on the grounds that the Plaintiff did not file an appeal.

F. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are business operators who have joined a mutual agreement on the deliberation of the dispute over the reimbursement of automobile insurance (hereinafter “instant agreement”), and the main contents of the instant agreement and the enforcement rules of the instant agreement are as follows.

. Automobile insurance;

arrow