logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.12.11 2018가단5018248
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurance company that entered into an automobile insurance contract with the Plaintiff in relation to the EF car (hereinafter referred to as “instant car”) by setting the insurance contract term from June 27, 2017 to June 27, 2018. Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) is a company that imports F vehicle and sells it to designated distributors, etc., and Defendant B Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant B”) is a company that purchases and sells F vehicle from Defendant C.

B. On November 5, 2017, G: (a) around 09:4, Hanam-si, the instant automobile was parked in an outdoor parking lot in front of the International Joint Market located in H, but the instant automobile was destroyed by fire in the front part of the instant automobile (hereinafter “instant fire”).

C. On December 1, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 57,480,000 as the vehicle insurance proceeds from the instant fire to the LAD.

[Reasons for Recognition] : Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s allegation that the instant fire was caused by the continuous containering of the instant automobile engine room on the iron Brackers (hereinafter “instant Brackers”) that caused damage to the protected clothes, due to the defect or defect in which the instant hackers were bound to fasten the wind hackers (hereinafter “the instant hackers”), which was installed between the car engine and the Dae-si Panel (hereinafter “the instant hackers”).

Defendant C is liable to compensate for damages caused by defects in the manufacture of the instant vehicle under the Product Liability Act or tort liability under Article 750 of the Civil Act, since it falls under “a person engaged in the business of importing products” as prescribed by Article 2 subparag. 3 of the Product Liability Act as “a person engaged in the business of importing products.”

Defendant B is the case.

arrow