(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.01.19 2015가단200153

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.01.19 2015가단200153

채무부존재확인

Text

1. A traffic accident on February 22, 2013, which occurred on the back side of the Cart in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government at around 21:39.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Fact 1) The Plaintiff is the Plaintiff and the E-vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”).

(2) Around February 22, 2013, when driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle on February 22, 2013 and making a left-hand turn on the back side of the Cmate in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant was shocked.

(See No. 2, 3) In the instant traffic accident, the Defendant suffered injury, such as damage to the fresh's fresh's fresh's fresh's fresh, damage to the fresh's fresh's fresh's fresh, closure of entree's fresh's fresh, and injury to the fresh's fresh's fresh's fresh. [In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, evidence Nos. 1 through 3, No.

B. According to the above facts, the instant traffic accident occurred due to the negligence of D driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and thus, the Plaintiff is liable to compensate the Defendant for the damages incurred pursuant to the comprehensive automobile insurance contract concluded with D.

C. However, according to the evidence revealed earlier, since the location of the instant traffic accident is an intersection where traffic is not controlled, the Defendant has a duty of care to safely walk with due care in traffic and traffic conditions of other vehicles, but neglected this duty, and it is recognized that the Defendant’s negligence caused the occurrence of the instant traffic accident and the expansion of damage.

Therefore, in calculating the amount of damages that the plaintiff should compensate, the responsibility of the plaintiff is limited to 80%.

2. The cost shall be calculated in accordance with the headmanem method which deducts intermediate interest calculated at the rate of 5/12 per month in the scope of the liability for damages, and the amount below the cost and below the month for the convenience of the pem shall be discarded, and it shall be rejected that the parties’ claims are not separately explained.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 5, 7.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.25 2015가단5024488

-서울서부지방법원 2015.12.10 2015가단20936

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.02.13 2014가단29615

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.12.04 2013가단180976

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.05.16 2017가단105687