logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.04.12 2018나112848
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

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the automobile C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to the automobile D (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On September 15, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle: (a) was in the direction of the 4nd line along the parallel of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the Defendant’s vehicle going along the 3nd line on the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was in the direction of the 4nd line among the 5nd line, and there was an accident of collision between the lower side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the lower part of the 4nd line of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On October 30, 2017, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 7,252,360 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. The key issue of the instant case is the fault ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and Defendant’s vehicle that contributed to the instant accident.

In full view of the following circumstances, the negligence ratio between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle may be determined to the extent of 70:30.

① At the time of the instant accident, signals, etc. in the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle had been finished, and immediately before a yellow signal was changed to a stop signal.

② The Defendant’s vehicle did not discover the Plaintiff’s vehicle coming from the right side at the place immediately preceding the intersection and did not change the lane.

③ However, at the time of change of direct promotion signal, the Defendant’s vehicle changed the vehicle line while lowering the speed, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was located at the right side was proceeding at a considerable speed, and the instant accident occurred.

(4) Bluices that contained an accident situation at the time.

arrow