1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurance company that has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to C vehicles owned by B (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the owner of D wheeled Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

B. At around 18:40 on March 30, 2015, B: (a) operated the Plaintiff’s vehicle at a three-distance intersection near the Seo-gu Hyundai Motor Port Service Center at the port of port; (b) had conflict with the Defendant’s Defendant’s vehicle, who was on the right right side from the left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s proceeding.

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

The Defendant’s vehicle was damaged by scers, etc. due to the instant accident in the Italian sports 300, 2010, and was stored in the maintenance business on March 30, 2015, but its repair was delayed due to a long time period for procuring parts.

The Defendant used the Defendant’s vehicle for commuting to and from work, and leased and used the Defendant’s vehicle and the said vehicle as KRW 100,000 per day from March 31, 2015 to May 8, 2015.

3. Loan charges;

(b) In cases of lending and borrowing (a) the amount of ordinary charges required to borrow the same kind of leased motor vehicle on the basis of the time of borrowing only the motor vehicle, in cases of a type of motor vehicle which can be used as a substitute for a leased motor vehicle;

(c)the recognition period (i)where possible, the period until the repairs are left and up to 30 days;

E. Of the terms and conditions of the insurance contract concluded with B (hereinafter “instant insurance”), the criteria for the payment of vehicle rental fees are as follows.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1-1, 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The occurrence and scope of liability to pay insurance proceeds;

A. According to the above facts, the accident of this case does not closely examine the movement of another vehicle that is directly engaged in left turn at the intersection B, and the defendant did not carefully examine the movement of another vehicle.