logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.21 2019나40255
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the automobile C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is a mutual aid operator who has entered into an automobile mutual aid contract with respect to the automobile D (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. On December 29, 2018, the Plaintiff’s vehicle runs one-lane between the two-lanes of the mine area of Gwangju Mine-gu, Seoul around 13:48.

In order to overtake the previous first-aid vehicle, the latter part of the Defendant vehicle, which changed from the front side to the second two-lane, to the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle, was collisioned with the front side of the Plaintiff vehicle.

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

By January 15, 2019, the Plaintiff paid the sum of KRW 15,890,000 for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident (hereinafter “instant insurance proceeds”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3 and 4, video, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to the principal negligence of Defendant 1 who changed the course, even though it should not interfere with the progress of Plaintiff 1’s vehicle while changing the course.

The Plaintiff exempted the Plaintiff from the Defendant’s driver by paying the instant insurance proceeds to the Plaintiff, so the Defendant, who is the mutual aid business operator of the Defendant’s vehicle, is obligated to pay the instant insurance proceeds to the Plaintiff as the amount of indemnity in accordance with the

3. According to the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings as seen earlier, snow was stored in the second lane at the point where the instant accident occurred. On the first lane at the point where the instant accident occurred, the freight vehicles, the Defendant vehicles, and the first-aid vehicles were in close vicinity, and thereafter the Plaintiff vehicle was approaching at a speed higher. At the time of the instant accident, the Defendant vehicle at the time of the instant accident.

arrow