logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.07.19 2018나51063
구상금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. With respect to A vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On December 29, 2016, around 15:00, the traffic accident occurred between the Defendant, who changed the vehicle from the first lane to the second lane, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle followed the Plaintiff’s vehicle from the first lane, and the Defendant’s vehicle driving the vehicle by changing the vehicle to the second lane in order to overtake the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

The part of the collision is the right side part and the front left side of the defendant vehicle.

C. On April 21, 2017, the Plaintiff, as the insurer of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, paid KRW 1,398,480 for the repair cost of the Defendant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 7 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above-mentioned facts and the evidence revealed earlier, the driver of the Defendant vehicle at the time of the occurrence of the foregoing traffic accident is deemed to have caused a traffic accident that causes the shock of the Plaintiff vehicle, which is the preceding vehicle, by neglecting his duty of care to ensure safety distance and to give prior attention to the traffic accident.

In this regard, the Defendant asserted that the traffic accident occurred due to the change of the vehicle A, but according to the evidence above, the Defendant had completed the change of the vehicle A before the vehicle A, so if the driver of the Defendant vehicle secured the safety distance and properly displayed the front line, the above traffic accident would not occur.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

Therefore, since the instant traffic accident occurred due to the total negligence of the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the insurance proceeds of KRW 1,398,480 and the following day after the payment of the insurance proceeds to the Plaintiff.

arrow