logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.18 2019나10308
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. At the time of the instant accident, the Defendant’s Insured Vehicle CD (hereinafter “Defendant’s Vehicle”) run in the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the accident at the time of the instant accident.

The upper part of the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”)’s front part on the right side of the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) and the front front part of the Defendant’s vehicle’s front front part on May 23, 2018 were paid insurance money with shocking, and there is no dispute over the damages on the Defendant’s own vehicle (based on recognition), Party A’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Party A’s evidence No. 6-1, Party A’s evidence No. 6-2, and Party B’s purport as a whole, or as a whole

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s driver’s fault ratio, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident occurred by the negligence of the Defendant’s driver, without properly checking the progress of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

However, according to the above evidence, it can be recognized that the defendant vehicle tried to change the lane before the plaintiff vehicle rather than the plaintiff vehicle. If so, the plaintiff vehicle driver also takes measures, such as checking the defendant vehicle to change the lane in front of the front road and reducing the speed, but the driver's negligence of the plaintiff vehicle driver who did not take such measures is the cause of occurrence and expansion of the accident in this case.

In light of the circumstances of the instant accident, it is reasonable to 30% of the negligence of the driver of the Plaintiff vehicle and 70% of the negligence of the driver of the Defendant vehicle.

B. According to the theory of lawsuit, the Defendant’s obligation to perform the Plaintiff from May 24, 2018, which was the date following the final payment date of insurance money, is either KRW 5,381,789 (7,68,270 x 70 %) as the amount of indemnity, or the Defendant’s obligation to perform the obligation.

arrow