The circumstances of the instant accident are as follows.

At the time of the accident, the Plaintiff’s insured vehicle B - On July 8, 2016, the fact that there is no dispute over the payment of the remaining amount of the Plaintiff’s insurance proceeds to the Defendant’s insured vehicle, KRW 3,878,500 (based on recognition), Gap’s evidence No. 1 through 3, Eul’s evidence No. 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole, the entire arguments, and the purport of the arguments.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the accident in this case occurred with a decline in the value of the plaintiff vehicle KRW 3,00,000, and sought compensation for the above damage to the defendant. Accordingly, the defendant does not have any portion that cannot be repaired on the plaintiff's vehicle. Thus, the damage of the decrease in the exchange value claimed by the plaintiff constitutes damage due to special circumstances, and there is no reason to deem that the defendant knew or could have known of it. Thus, the defendant is not obligated to compensate for the above damage.

B. In the event that an article is damaged due to a tort, the amount of ordinary damages shall be the cost of repair if it is possible to repair, the amount of exchange value if it is impossible to repair, and the amount of exchange value reduced due to impossibility of repair where part of repair remains after repair remains, in addition to the cost of repair, it constitutes ordinary damages.

According to the above facts and evidence, the accident of this case occurred at the time when 10 days have elapsed since the registration of new vehicles, and due to the accident of this case, the plaintiff's vehicle was damaged to the extent that the repair cost of 3,878,500 won is required, such as cutting the members of a set of gyds, back a white gymnas, cut off the gymnas, and replacing the gymnas to the gymnas.