beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 2,180,00 and shall pay to the plaintiff from May 16, 2014.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a private taxi business operator, and the Defendant is not more than C-Defendant vehicle, as the borrower of the B rocketing vehicle (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).
'The automobile insurance contract of this case' is 'the automobile insurance contract of this case'.
is an insurance company that has entered into the agreement.
B. On March 14, 2014, at around 21:20, the Plaintiff was waiting for the signal while driving the instant vehicle. However, “the instant accident” caused by the Defendant’s vehicle driving D to shock the back of the instant vehicle from the Defendant’s vehicle.
(C) The Plaintiff was paid KRW 4,370,00 on the repair cost of the instant vehicle. The Defendant paid KRW 2,190,000 on the ground that the said amount exceeded the payment standards of insurance proceeds stipulated in the instant insurance contract (12,989,091 won (new rent) ¡¿ 12.1 (Additional Tax) ¡¿ 12.8% (12.8%) x 120%) x 120%). The Plaintiff did not pay the remainder of KRW 2,180,000 on April 14, 2014. The Plaintiff directly paid KRW 2,180,000 on the repair cost of the instant vehicle to the repair factory that repaired the instant vehicle. [In the absence of dispute over the recognition, evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and evidence No. 1 through 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings, images, and the purport of all pleadings, as a whole.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant vehicle is a business taxi and its age was 2 years and 8 months or remaining, and its age was 100,000, and the Plaintiff cannot purchase the new vehicle, and thus, it was repaired in its original condition to operate the instant vehicle up to the age limit. This constitutes a case where there are special circumstances that may arise in light of ordinary social norms to repair the instant vehicle even after paying repair costs higher than exchange prices. Therefore, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the full repair costs incurred by the Plaintiff, and thus, the remainder of the repair costs should be additionally paid KRW 2,180,000 to the Plaintiff. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that the instant vehicle occurred due to the instant accident.