logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.15 2019나76391
손해배상(자)
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following amount.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) E is the Fpoter vehicle around 05:12 on July 21, 2017 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

2) While driving the vehicle and driving the vehicle, while driving the vehicle at a point of 151.8 km in the Central Expressway located in the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun, the Gyeong-gun,

). 2) 그런데 E는 묘지작업을 수주해서 이 작업을 하기 위하여 이동 중이었고, 그 작업인부로 E의 친구인 G(이하 ‘망인’이라 한다)을 피고차량 조수석에 태워서 데려가고 있었는바, 망인은 이 사건 사고로 인하여 피고차량 밖으로 튕겨져 나왔고, 결국 피고차량 밑에서 발견되었는데, 같은 날 사망하였다.

3) The Plaintiff C is the deceased’s spouse, the Plaintiff A, and B’s children, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle. 【In the absence of any dispute, the grounds for recognition”, the evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (each of the descriptions, images, and arguments including each number), and the purport of the entire pleadings

B. According to the above recognition of liability, since the deceased died due to the operation of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant, as the insurer of the Defendant’s vehicle, is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the instant accident.

C. (1) It is recognized that the instant accident was caused while the Defendant Vehicle E, who was on board the deceased without compensation and moved the deceased from Daegu to inside, including the above facts acknowledged as well as the purport of the entire arguments and the evidence presented in the above belief, was found to have been included in the scope of liability, and in particular, the Defendant Vehicle E at the time of the accident.

arrow