beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 28,068,157 with respect to the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from July 14, 2016 to May 12, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with Nonparty A (hereinafter only referred to as the Plaintiff’s vehicle) and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with Defendant C (hereinafter referred to as Defendant 1’s vehicle) and D (hereinafter referred to as Defendant 2’s vehicle).
B. On February 7, 2016, the traffic accident occurred, at around 13:30, that driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle and driven the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and then driven in the front door of the Daegu-gu dong-gu first apartment complex located in Do one-lane (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”). On the right side of the road from the 2nd side of the tomb, the traffic accident was caused by the traffic accident where the non-party E, who was left and left at the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was driven toward the lower side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “the accident of this case”). The above accident was killed.
C. On July 13, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 280,000,000 for damages to his/her heir’s heir under the said comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the said Party A, and paid KRW 681,570 for medical expenses on July 11, 2016.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 9 and Eul evidence 1 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)
2. The point where the allegation of this case occurred is where parking or stopping is prohibited in order to ensure the safety of the residents entering the road from the right side of the apartment complex of this case, but the drivers of Defendant 1 and 2 vehicles did not see at all the right side part of the direction of the passage due to the passage of the city.
Therefore, since the accident of this case occurred or expanded by finding the above Gap's entry of the bicycle on the road late, the driver of the defendant 1, the driver of the defendant 2 and the above A shall be liable for damages of the above E as joint tortfeasor.
Therefore, the plaintiff is therefore A's.