logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.01.14 2020나16401
구상금
Text

The appeal by the defendant (the appointed party) is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant (appointed party).

the purport and purpose of the claim;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive insurance contract with respect to H vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”). The I is the owner of J-wheeled vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”), and K Co., Ltd is the insurer who entered into a liability insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

B. Around 21:50 on May 8, 2013, the Defendant driven the Defendant’s vehicle and driven the Defendant’s vehicle in front of M Middle School L in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, causing an accident in which the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle left and front side of the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(c)

The instant accident caused the Plaintiff’s driver’s injury, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 9,538,840,000 to N by May 23, 2019, for medical expenses, damages, etc., and received KRW 80,000 from K Co., Ltd., the Defendant’s insurer, on December 15, 2015.

(d)

I died on April 9, 2017, and the defendant and the sperm will be the heir of I.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry and video of Gap evidence 1 to 10 (including branch numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned facts and the purport of the entire pleadings, the instant accident occurred due to the Defendant’s fault, while driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle entering the private distance intersection and the Defendant’s vehicle entering the private distance intersection, and the Defendant’s fault finding the Plaintiff’s vehicle entering the intersection late on the right side, without thoroughly examining whether there was a vehicle leaving the right side from the private distance to the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

It is reasonable to view the negligence ratio between the driver of the plaintiff vehicle and the defendant as 70:30 in light of the above circumstances, the vehicle of the plaintiff, the vehicle of the defendant, the vehicle of the defendant, the vehicle of the plaintiff, the vehicle of the right side, the vehicle of both parties, etc.

(b)the defendant and the defendant;

arrow