손해배상
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. Basic facts
A. On January 18, 2014, the Plaintiff (son) driven a D i30 vehicle owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) and caused the Plaintiff to gas in the “Fjuju station” located in Ilyang-dong, Manyang-si, U.S. in the Defendant’s operation. The Defendant’s employee provided a small amount of gasoline on the instant vehicle, which is a diesel vehicle.
(hereinafter “instant incident”). B.
C continued driving of the instant vehicle immediately after the instant oil accident, and was frightened, etc., and the Plaintiff was driving the instant vehicle at KRW 90,000 following the following day, and left it to the Hyundai Automobile Original Service Center.
C. In the above service center, the instant vehicle was operated after mixing with the instant vehicle, taking into account that the RPM instability has occurred, the relevant parts, such as fuel tank sembl, fuel projector sembl, etc., were replaced. The Plaintiff spent KRW 2,626,580 in total the repair cost.
[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap's evidence 1, Gap's evidence 3, Gap's evidence 6, Gap's evidence 8, the purport of whole pleadings
2. Summary of the parties' arguments
A. The Plaintiff suffered damages of KRW 2,626,580 for automobile repair expenses, KRW 50,00 for gas supply expenses at the time of the instant vehicle repair accident, KRW 30,000 for gas supply expenses at the time of the instant vehicle repair, KRW 90,00 for towing expenses for the instant vehicle, and KRW 100,00 for transportation expenses from the Plaintiff’s day delivery to Seoul, and thus, the Defendant is liable for compensation to the Plaintiff.
B. The Defendant’s employee, upon the Defendant’s immediately following the instant oil accident, operated the instant vehicle by deeming that C is fine, and the volume of the mixed gasoline at the time was merely 0.135 liters, and thus, it is difficult to deem that any problem has occurred on the instant vehicle.
In addition, since the plaintiff voluntarily replaced all parts, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.
3. Determination
A. We examine the occurrence of liability for damages.