logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.23 2016나10123
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. Basic facts

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

B. Around 15:00 on August 15, 2014, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle: (a) driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle and passed the three-lanes from the three-lane distance near the public parking lot to the inner direction of the front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in front of the front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, which had attempted to turn to the left at the three-lane in the same direction while driving the three-lanes in front of the front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in front of the front line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On April 28, 2015, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 4,288,020 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In light of the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s vehicle attempted to turn to the left at the three-distance intersection where the left is prohibited as stated earlier; (b) the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the above three-lane intersection normally in accordance with the straight line; and (c) the Defendant’s vehicle appears to have attempted to turn to the left without verifying the vehicle going through the intersection at the three-lane intersection; and (d) the vehicle driving in the opposite direction at the three-lane to the same direction without verifying the two-lane vehicle going through the intersection, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident occurred due to the previous negligence of the Defendant

Therefore, the defendant's insurance proceeds of KRW 4,288,020 paid by the plaintiff to the plaintiff and the plaintiff's insurance proceeds, upon the plaintiff's request, is about the promotion of the lawsuit from April 29, 2015 to August 21, 2015, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, which is 5% per annum under the Civil Act, and the next day to the day of full payment.

arrow