logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2020.11.20 2019가단74570
손해배상(자)
Text

Defendant: (a) KRW 84,935,156, respectively, to Plaintiff A, KRW 137,402,734, Plaintiff B, and C; and (b) from June 2, 2019 to November 2, 2020.

Reasons

1. The occurrence of the instant accident, as a result, of the occurrence of the liability for damages, – [Grounds for recognition] unsatisfy, and the evidence E of Nos. 1 through 3, 7 through 23, and the F chartered bus was driven under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.08% from the 11st complex distance located in Ansan-si, Ansan-si on June 2, 2019.

At this time, E passed an intersection while violating the signal without properly doing so, and shocked G H private taxi operated under normal signals.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). G in the instant accident was killed in the same place.

[hereinafter] The status of the Plaintiff as a party refers to G as “the deceased.” The Plaintiff’s spouse, Plaintiff B, and C jointly inherited the deceased’s property as the deceased’s children.

The defendant has the honor to enter into a mutual aid agreement for chartered buses which he has driven.

As above, the accident of this case is the result of E’s drinking and traffic signal violation driving, and as such, the defendant, the insurer of the injured vehicle, shall compensate the plaintiffs, who are the inheritor of the deceased, for the damages caused by the accident.

(A) On the other hand, there is no reason for offsetting negligence or limitation of liability because the accident occurred due to the mistake of E.). The process of the pleading in the scope of damages and the key court, while proceeding the date for preparatory pleading, have decided to recommend reconciliation in accordance with the provisional judgment until the time based on both the arguments.

(See the reasoning of the Reconciliation Recommendation Decision, April 10, 2020. The plaintiff and the defendant filed an objection against this Order. ① The plaintiff evaluated the amount of base income of the deceased as low, and ② The defendant presented reasons for objection against the high amount of funeral expenses and consolation money.

(See the first date for pleading). Ultimately, the grounds for filing an objection are the core contents of the pleading surrounding the scope of damages, and thus, the first time.

arrow