A. B, around 17:51 on October 14, 2012, driven a C vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) and driven a front road in the Gyeonggi Pyeong-gun, the front side of the vehicle driven by the Plaintiff was shocked to the front side of the Defendant vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant accident”. (b)

In the accident of this case, the water dives (hereinafter referred to as "the dives of this case") which were loaded on the said dives of the vehicles were damaged.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3 (including each number for those with several numbers), Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, each of the following facts can be acknowledged at the time of the instant accident. However, in full view of the entries in the evidence Nos. 3 and 4, it is reasonable to deem that the instant accident occurred during the course of the Plaintiff’s possession after the Plaintiff purchased the instant OE from G, and that the Plaintiff actually owned the instant OE at the time of the instant accident, as long as the Plaintiff completely paid the purchase price, the owner of OE at the time of the instant accident is deemed to be the Plaintiff at the time of the instant accident.

Therefore, as long as the error of this case owned by the plaintiff was damaged due to the accident of this case, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant, at the time of the instant accident, does not operate the night lighting of the vehicle.