beta
Text
1. On November 13, 2013, at around 16:05, six (6)-ro, Jung-gu, Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, in the course of the operation of B vehicles.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with C and B (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”).
B. At around 16:00 on November 13, 2013, C driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle into the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle while driving on the road in C’s 18-17-ro, Jung-gu, Seoul, in a two-lane way from D to 6:0.
(hereinafter referred to as “the instant accident”). [The grounds for recognition: the fact that there is no dispute, the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the entire pleadings]
2. If the plaintiff, who is the debtor in a lawsuit to confirm the existence of a claim, denies the fact that the cause of the claim occurred by specifying the first claim in the lawsuit to confirm the existence of a claim, the defendant, the creditor, has the responsibility to specifically claim and prove the elements of his legal relationship, i.e., active, passive, and consolation money in accordance with the three-minute theory of damages.
However, the defendant did not properly assert or prove despite the order to prepare for the statement of the full bench, and the written application for the statement of evidence Nos. 3 through 5 or the written application for the statement of evidence Nos. 3 through 5 cannot be deemed to have asserted or proved the specific amount of damages.
However, according to the result of the appraisal commission with respect to the Korean Professional Engineers Association of this Court, it is recognized that the repair period of 3 to 4 days is required to repair the Defendant's erroneous soil due to the instant accident, and that the repair cost is KRW 50,000,000, in addition to the above repair cost, the Plaintiff is a debt of 39,000,000 (the rental fee of 130,000,000,000 won (the rental fee of 550,000 + the repair cost of 39,000 won x 4 days) according to the terms and conditions of the rental contract (Evidence 3) during the repair period of 4 days.
Therefore, with respect to the accident of this case, the plaintiff except the above 706,000 won is against the defendant.