1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with A and its holding B carren vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”) from September 22, 2013 to August 6, 2014, and the Defendant is a stock company conducting automobile maintenance business, etc.

B. A, around July 26, 2014, entrusted the Defendant with the inspection and repair of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and stored the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the Defendant’s maintenance room.

At around 13:20 on the same day, the Defendant inspected the spugbembl, etc. of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and completed repair work, such as replacing expendable goods, and released the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

C. After completion of the repair of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, at around 14:47 on the same day, A left the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the side of the road where the Plaintiff’s PEM store is high, and thereafter, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was immediately loaded on the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant fire”). D.

On August 11, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,980,000 insurance money to A in accordance with the automobile insurance contract, and returned KRW 300,000 as the proceeds from the sale of the remaining goods on August 18, 201, and finally paid to A is KRW 7,680,000.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Defendant was requested to repair the Plaintiff’s vehicle but failed to repair the Plaintiff’s vehicle properly, thereby causing the instant fire. Accordingly, the Defendant is liable to compensate for damages to A who failed to repair the Plaintiff’s vehicle properly. As such, the Defendant was exempted from liability on behalf of the Plaintiff, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to claim the said KRW 7,680,000 and its delay damages to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 682 of the Commercial Act. 2)