logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.02.17 2020나8554
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to C vehicles, and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles.

B. The circumstances surrounding the instant accident are as follows.

At the time of the accident, the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle (Plaintiff’s insured vehicle)’s insured vehicle CD date and around 09:45 on July 12, 2019, the insured vehicle (Defendant’s vehicle) went into the Seoul Arts Center from the 1st page of the enclosed name to the 1st page of the art center. On July 17, 2019, the Plaintiff, as the insurer of the Plaintiff, paid KRW 94,400 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (No. 3, the Plaintiff’s self-charges No. 200, No. 1 through No. 75, No. 1, No. 1, 300, the remainder of the Defendant’s vehicle’s left side, which came into the left side from the right side of the instant intersection, conflict with the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”). The amount of the insurance money paid to the Plaintiff’s insurer, including the Plaintiff’s charges No. 20, No. 300, Jan. 1, 2001 through No.

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. In the Plaintiff’s vehicle, the Defendant’s vehicle entered the instant intersection at a small channel, and the instant accident occurred due to the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle at an rapid speed without temporary suspension, it is reasonable to view that the negligence ratio between the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver is 30:70.

B. The instant intersection is difficult to distinguish between the Plaintiff’s driver and the Defendant’s driver’s fault on the ground that there is a small difference in the narrow width, and the Defendant’s vehicle advanced into the instant intersection, and the instant accident occurred due to the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was bound to the decline, it is reasonable to view the Defendant’s driver’s and the Defendant’s driver’s fault ratio as 60:40.

3. Determination

A. We examine the following, admitted by each of the above evidence:

arrow