KG Mobility has called into question the objectivity and reliability of a reenactment test conducted to determine the cause of a suspected sudden acceleration accident. (Image courtesy of Yonhap)
SEOUL, Jun. 11 (Korea Bizwire) – KG Mobility, a South Korean automaker, has called into question the objectivity and reliability of a reenactment test conducted to determine the cause of a suspected sudden acceleration accident in the city of Gangneung that occurred a year and a half ago, resulting in the death of a young boy.
In a statement issued on June 10, KG Mobility asserted that the findings presented by the plaintiffs regarding the reenactment test conducted on the roads of Gangneung contained inaccuracies and diverged from the facts.
The reenactment test was carried out in April and the results were unveiled in May.
This represents the first official statement from KG Mobility since the suspected sudden acceleration incident in Gangneung.
The accident took place on December 6, 2022, when a driver, identified as Mr. A, was operating a KG Mobility sports utility vehicle (SUV) in Gangneung, Gangwon Province.
Tragically, Mr. A’s grandson, who was a passenger in the vehicle, lost his life in the crash.
In response, Mr. A and his family filed a damages lawsuit against KG Mobility, the vehicle’s manufacturer, seeking approximately 760 million won in compensation. The legal proceedings are currently ongoing.
During the court-appointed expert’s reenactment of the accident, evidence emerged suggesting that Mr. A did not depress the accelerator pedal, lending credence to the plaintiffs’ assertion that a vehicle defect, rather than pedal misapplication, caused the sudden acceleration.
Emboldened by these findings, the victims’ family has argued that a flaw in the vehicle triggered the incident.
KG Mobility plant in Pyeongtaek (Image courtesy of KG Mobility)
However, KG Mobility has refuted the objectivity of the reenactment test.
The automaker stated that the April reenactment on the roads of Gangneung was conducted under conditions proposed by the plaintiffs, which diverged from the objective data and analysis provided by the National Forensic Service regarding the acceleration scenario, discrepancies between the accident vehicle and the test vehicle, and differences in road conditions.
Regarding a separate assessment conducted by the plaintiffs last month on the operation of the emergency braking assistance system (AEB), KG Mobility questioned its objectivity, stating that “private appraisals conducted outside the court’s purview cannot be considered reliable evidence.”
Moreover, KG Mobility refuted the plaintiffs’ claim that the AEB’s failure to activate indicated a vehicle defect.
The automaker asserted that the AEB did not engage because the driver had depressed the accelerator pedal more than 60% during the impending collision, meeting the predetermined conditions for disabling the system.
While acknowledging the family’s grief over the tragic accident, KG Mobility explained that it had initially refrained from making public statements out of concern for causing further distress.
However, the company deemed it essential to correct inaccuracies and provide accurate information.
KG Mobility affirmed its commitment to diligently pursuing the truth throughout the legal proceedings, stating, “We are doing our utmost to uncover the substantive truth of this case during the trial process.”
Kevin Lee (kevinlee@koreabizwire.com)
