beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants exceeding the amount ordered to be paid under the following is revoked.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The Plaintiff is an insurer that has entered into a comprehensive insurance contract for business purpose automobiles (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) no later than May 9, 201 with respect to 1 ton strawing vehicles, which are their owned vehicles, with E (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) by May 9, 201.
At around 19:45, August 22, 2011, Defendant A, who only subscribed to liability insurance, driven a Cone Star Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant A”) on the part of the driver’s left front line of the Plaintiff’s right-hand front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which was directly driven from the first line of the same direction, was shocked by the front line of the Defendant’s left-hand front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, in front of the bus terminal at the Hanpo-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Seoan-gun, Seoan-gun, the front line of the Plaintiff’s right-hand front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, in front of the bus terminal at the right-hand side of the two-lane road.
(hereinafter referred to as “the instant accident”. E was treated by suffering from the injury of the brain-dead, salute, salute, salute, salute, and both sides of the instant accident, due to the shock of the head of the instant accident.
In accordance with the insurance contract in this case, the Plaintiff paid 67,181,040 won insurance money to E until July 3, 2012 (i.e., 11,025,000 won (i.e., 56,456,040 won from loss of 11,025,000 won - 30,000 won from the previous payment insurance money - 45,00,000 won x 50% of the normal standard contractual terms x 50% x 70% of the labor capacity loss x 70% of the negligence x 1,68,337 x 50% of the monthly income x 50% of the loss rate of labor capacity x 96.6849 x 70% of the negligence).
On August 2, 2012, the Plaintiff returned KRW 40,000,000 from the Eastern Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., the insurer of liability insurance purchased on the Defendant’s vehicle.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, Gap evidence No. 7-1, 2, 3, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, video, and all pleadings.