(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.08.27 2018나78901

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.08.27 2018나78901

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. Cases of indemnity between the insurers of vehicles involved in a traffic accident;

A. On March 9, 2018, at the time of the collision between the circumstances surrounding the accident, the insured vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”) Defendant Mutual Aid Vehicle CD (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) and the front-hand side of the Plaintiff vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) left the vehicle at the three-lane (on March 14:23, 2018, the situation of collision between the circumstances surrounding the accident in front of the road in front of the area of the branch of Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si. The Plaintiff vehicle continued to stop on the two-lane and entered the two-lane. The Defendant vehicle, while driving on the two-lane, was reported on the Plaintiff vehicle, was facing the front part and the left-hand side of the front-hand part of the vehicle.

Details of the payment of insurance proceeds on April 12, 2018, 5,429,000 won for the repair of the Plaintiff’s vehicle

B. The instant accident, which judged negligence, did not properly examine the following vehicles, and did not properly examine the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle entering the two lanes, and the previous vehicle entering the two lanes, and caused the negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, which did not properly reduce the speed and the direction.

In light of the background of this accident, the shock of the vehicle, especially the fact that the Plaintiff’s vehicle stops after stopping, it is reasonable to view the fault ratio of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle as 80:20.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

C. Defendant’s obligation of reimbursement of KRW 1,085,80 ( = 5,429,00 x 0.2) (the first instance court has cited KRW 1,085,960 and damages for delay thereof, but only the Plaintiff appealed and does not change the judgment of the first instance court unfavorably)

2. Conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is not reasonable.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.21 2018나71757

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.23 2018나62081

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.07.14 2019나79079

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.21 2018나63572

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.21 2018나61262