1. The Defendant’s KRW 8,820,00 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from May 29, 2014 to February 26, 2015, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 19, 201, at around 13:06, A driven a B-Motor vehicle on December 19, 201 (hereinafter referred to as “the instant A-Motor vehicle”) and runs along the long-term distance at the Jinyang-si, Jin-si, Nam-si, and conflicting the rear part of the C-driving D (hereinafter referred to as “the instant damaged vehicle”).

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

The defendant is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with respect to the instant vehicle.

C. At the time of the instant accident, C was carrying 23 electronic display boards owned by the Plaintiff on the damaged vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Uncontentious facts, Gap 1 through 5 evidence, each entry of Eul 5 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. Inasmuch as an electronic sign board owned by the Plaintiff was destroyed due to the instant accident by the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for KRW 52,800,000, which is the value of supply of the electronic sign board.

B. The Defendant’s assertion was destroyed by 70,000,000 among the 23 electronic display boards.

In the instant case, transporting high-priced electronic sign boards constitutes special damage and the perpetrator A was unaware of this fact, and the Defendant did not have any liability to compensate for special damage.

Even if liability for damages is recognized, it is limited to KRW 4,900,000, which is the amount equivalent to the repair cost of the electronic sign board, and there is no liability to compensate for the value of supply.

In addition, the plaintiff's negligence should be considered in the amount of damages, as the damage was increased by transporting electronic sign boards without properly fixing them in the damaged vehicle.

C. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement of No. 5 of the plate (1) as a whole, it is confirmed on December 24, 201 that 23 electronic displays asserted by an adjuster delegated by the Defendant visiting the Plaintiff’s place of business on the part of December 24, 201 to the effect that the Plaintiff suffered damage. As a result, 50,000 unit price per unit price was 520 source price per unit price, 2,200 unit price per unit price, 520 unit price per unit price, 520 source price per unit price, 520 source price per unit price, 1 group of 4