1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant Company is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to B NewM5 vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”), and C around April 3, 2016, while driving the Defendant vehicle on the front side of the Jinju-dong Round, caused a traffic accident (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

B. The Defendant Company paid to the Plaintiff KRW 3,326,060, a sum of KRW 2,722,430, and indirect damages KRW 603,630,060, with the insurance proceeds arising from the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The driver C, the insured of the comprehensive automobile insurance contract concluded with the Defendant Company claiming the Plaintiff, destroyed the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the negligence of the driver C, who was the insured of the comprehensive automobile insurance contract, and the occurrence of any loss of exchange value decline in the middle and high-class market after the repair of the said vehicle, the Defendant Company shall pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 1,538,717 equivalent to the

3. The amount of damages when an article was damaged due to a tort shall be the cost of repair if it is possible to repair the article. If it is impossible to repair the article, the exchange value shall be the amount of damages (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da52889, Nov. 13, 2001). Therefore, in order to recognize a vehicle’s exchange value reduction due to an accident, it should be proven that some parts are impossible to repair after repair.

However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the parts that could not be repaired on the Plaintiff’s vehicle remain due to the instant accident. Rather, in light of the record of No. 4 and the fact-finding results on the Party’s trial E, the damage of the Plaintiff’s vehicle caused by the instant accident is a crime-changing painting, a bitle cream exchange painting, and a number plate manufacture exchange.