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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 9, 2015, Defendant B was under the influence of alcohol with 0.147% by blood alcohol content, and Defendant B was driving a D Uididi vehicle owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “accidentd vehicle”) and caused damage to the said vehicle by taking off a vehicle blocking strings installed on the locked Han River Park.

B. On July 16, 2015, the Plaintiff sold the accident vehicle to E in KRW 29,000,000.

C. On July 21, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased 47,000,000 FEN used cars for KRW 47,00.

(hereinafter referred to as “high-speed vehicle”). Part of the purchase price shall be appropriated as the selling price of the vehicle involved in the accident, and the remainder amount of KRW 21,300,000 shall be paid in installments in 98,800 per month for 24 months.

On September 17, 2015, Defendant C, the mother of Defendant B, remitted to the Plaintiff KRW 780,000, which is a part of the monthly installments of KRW 988,800.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 3, 7, 11 through 16, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Chief;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants decided to sell the vehicle involved in the accident and to purchase the vehicle while on the move of the vehicle at KRW 60,000,000 or KRW 70,000,00.

The Plaintiff introduced the Defendants, accompanied with the middle and high-speed with the Defendants with their driver G, and confirmed the Defendants’ intention by making daily contact when determining whether to purchase the middle and high-ranking vehicles.

When purchasing the instant used vehicle, the Plaintiff made an oral agreement on KRW 200,000 out of the monthly payment of KRW 988,800, which is the remainder of KRW 788,800, which is to be borne by the Defendants.

The Defendants shall pay 18,151,200 won (=78,800 won x 24 months - 780,000 won) and delay damages for the remaining vehicle installments to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendants asserted that they did not agree with the Plaintiff.

After the accident of this case, the plaintiff associated with the defendant B, and the defendant B did not know about the compensation for damages to the accident vehicle.

Defendant B’s Hague defect in the Plaintiff.