logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.06 2019나4969
구상금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with Nonparty C on the D vehicle owned by Nonparty C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle E (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On January 22, 2018, the date and time of the instant accident: At around 12:40, Jan. 22, 2018: A general restaurant located in F in the Gu/U.S.

C. 1) The Defendant’s vehicle is a road at the time and place of the accident (hereinafter “instant road”) at the same time and place.

) On the parking lot located on the right side of the road of this case, the road of this case has not been entered and the road of this case has not been entered, and the road of this case (Ma2 is the defendant vehicle, and the vehicle of this case has been inspected is the plaintiff vehicle.

(2) The Plaintiff’s vehicle was running along the road at the rear of the Defendant’s vehicle at the same time and at the same place. However, the restriction speed of the instant road was against 80km/h, and the driving speed of the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the time is presumed to be 100 to 105km/h.

3) The Defendant’s vehicle discovered the Plaintiff’s vehicle running along the front side at a much speed above its own speed and attempted to change the vehicle into a two-lane. The Plaintiff’s vehicle changed the vehicle to a two-lane to overtake the Defendant vehicle at the same time with the Defendant’s vehicle almost at a speed lower than its own vehicle. Unlike its own intent, the Plaintiff’s vehicle also changed the vehicle to a two-lane to avoid collision with the Defendant’s vehicle while avoiding collision with the Defendant’s vehicle.

(5) The Plaintiff paid KRW 2,810,000 for street lamps and signboard restoration expenses on March 23, 2018, in accordance with the payment criteria for the automobile insurance contract with C, who is the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, as the insurance money (hereinafter “instant accident”).

arrow