logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.10 2017나29803
손해배상(자)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is rendered in accordance with Paragraph (1) of this Article.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The 2nd to 17th of the judgment of the first instance shall be written by cutting the 5th of the judgment of the second instance as follows:

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff’s vehicle B around 13:00 on December 13, 2014 (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”).

)A vehicle with C Spoe-c (hereinafter referred to as “spokeing vehicle”) which has been driven by a vehicle and stopped into a vehicle, while driving along two lanes from the area of the main road in Seocho-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City to the area of the main road in the area of the main road in Seoul.

2) The instant prior accident was shocked and stopped (hereinafter “instant prior accident”).

ii) the E-vehicle following the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”);

) The back part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was received (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) The Plaintiff received treatment for brain-dead, etc.

3) The Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle. [Grounds for recognition] A’s evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 3 (which include each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

(2) the purport of the whole of the statements or images, as set forth in sub-paragraph (1) to (3) of this section

B. According to the facts of recognition, the defendant, who is the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused by the accident of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

On the 3rd to 9th parallel vehicles of the first instance judgment, the Makameras has been installed on the sponsed vehicle of the third to 8th parallel vehicles of the third to 9th parallel vehicles. The 3rd parallel vehicles of the third to 12th parallel vehicles of the first instance judgment have been installed on the sponsed vehicle. The 13th parallel vehicles of the third to 13th parallel vehicle of the first instance judgment have been installed on the sponsed vehicle of the third to 18th parallel vehicles of the first instance judgment. "253,415 won" of the 3rd parallel vehicle of the third to 18th parallel.

arrow