1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following part ordering payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 20, 2013, the Defendant installed an automatic control device against the snow at the port 536th (536th) Hasan-dong, Ansan-gu, Annsan-si, with a view to discharging water in the vicinity of the road, even if snow was not found due to the malfunction of the device.

B. At around 13:45 on the same day, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) driven the E New Franchiseer’s car, which was owned by the Plaintiff, and turned down on the road that was on the side of the road, and turned down on the road.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

After the accident of this case, the plaintiff spreaded sand on the road that was loaded on the side of the road, and again sprinked on the sprinked vehicle after the accident of this case.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant second accident”) D.

Due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s car was damaged, and the repair cost was required to be KRW 1,759,237.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “former Marine Fire Insurance”) with respect to the said car, and the contract included a special agreement under which modern marine fire insurance is to pay insurance proceeds with respect to self-vehicle damage.

The Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance paid KRW 880,000 to the Plaintiff as insurance money for the instant accident according to the said special agreement.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, and fact finding about modern marine fire insurance by the court of the trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding that the accident in this case occurred due to the defendant's management defect, who is the manager of the road at the location where the accident occurred, and the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damage caused by the accident in this case

3. Scope of damages.

A. This case’s automobile repair cost per property damage is due to the accident.