logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.12.05 2019나53817
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurance company that entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the automobile C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), with respect to the automobile D (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On December 8, 2018, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle run one-lane of the eight-lanes in front of the entrance of the F in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, with the front of the eight-lanes in front of the entrance of the F in Seocho-gu, Seoul. The front of the two-lanes are followed by the front of the vehicle.

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

On December 20, 2018, the Plaintiff deducted KRW 200,000,000 from the total damages 633,000 incurred by the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident, and paid KRW 433,00 to G Southern Maintenance Business Center at the cost of repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 4's motion pictures and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above recognition of liability, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident resulted from the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle moving from the two-lane to the one-lane between the two-lanes in the front of the road. As such, the main responsibility for the instant accident lies on the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Therefore, the defendant who is the defendant vehicle insurance company is obliged to claim for reimbursement to the plaintiff who paid the plaintiff vehicle repair cost.

B. In full view of the facts acknowledged prior to the limitation of liability, the instant accident contributed to the occurrence of the instant accident and the expansion of damage by taking account of the video images of Gap evidence Nos. 3 and Eul evidence Nos. 4.

Therefore, the defendant's liability is limited to 70% in consideration of the error of the driver of the plaintiff's vehicle as above.

(c)the scope of indemnity shall be received from the insurer.

arrow