1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the B ASEAN vehicle (hereinafter “instant vehicle”). The Defendant is an insurer that entered into an automobile damage insurance contract with Nonparty D, the owner of the Crocketing vehicle, seeking to compensate for the damage caused by an accident during the operation of the said rocketing vehicle.

B. On June 5, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) driven the instant vehicle and stopped at the entrance of the rest forest in the Yindo-Indo-ro, Chungcheongnam-do; (b) however, Nonparty D caused an accident that partially conflicts with the front and rear sides of the instant vehicle’s driving seat with the said rocketing vehicle.

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

The main repair contents of the instant vehicle due to the instant accident are wheel replacement in front of and after the direction of the driving seat, replacement in front of the direction of the driving seat, replacement in front of the steering seat, replacement in front of the direction of the driving seat, the center gate in the direction of the driving seat and the back fences.

In accordance with the terms and conditions, the Defendant paid 11,665,500 won (including value-added tax 1,060,500, including value-added tax, 10,605,000) and 1,080,000 won (excluding value-added tax) for repair costs, excluding value-added tax, to the Plaintiff’s compensation for damages arising from the automobile price fall.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 6, Eul evidence 1, 9, 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since the accident of this case caused damage to the value decline equivalent to KRW 4,234,343 in addition to the above repair cost, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff the above value decline damage amounting to KRW 4,234,343 and delay damages.

B. The Defendant’s loss of value decline cannot be acknowledged.

In addition, since the defendant paid the plaintiff KRW 1,080,00 corresponding to the value decline damage according to the automobile insurance clause, it does not bear any obligation more than the plaintiff.

3. The victim has the insurer to determine whether to exempt the defendant from liability under the automobile insurance clause.