beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. On June 5, 2012, the fact that the Defendant driving a C vehicle on the part of June 2012 and driving a C vehicle on the road of the Busan Seo-dong, Busan, and changing the lane from the three-lane to the four-lanes, the Plaintiff’s left side of the D vehicle, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle completed repair on the left side, back, rearer, left side penter, etc., and the Defendant’s assistant participant who entered into a mutual aid agreement with the Defendant paid KRW 5,493,00 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is found to be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) there is no dispute between the parties, or the entire purport of oral proceedings as stated in the evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6.
2. On August 13, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred the Plaintiff’s vehicle to KRW 3.2 million or KRW 16.8 million below the market price due to the depreciation rate caused by the instant accident; and (b) the Defendant asserts that he/she has a duty to compensate for the amount of KRW 3.2 million from the shooting damage.
The amount of damages when the goods are damaged due to a tort shall be the cost of repair if it is possible to repair them, and if it is impossible to repair them, the reduced exchange value shall be the ordinary amount of damages, and if parts that cannot be partially repaired remain after repair, the reduced exchange value shall be the ordinary amount of damages in addition to the cost of repair.
(See Supreme Court Decision 91Da28719 delivered on February 11, 1992). The fact that the repair of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was completed, and the fact that the Defendant’s Intervenor paid the repair cost in full is as seen earlier, and further, whether some parts are impossible to repair despite the above repair of the vehicle remains.
The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by integrating the above evidence and evidence No. 7’s overall purport of the pleading, namely, the damaged part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, is merely the back door of the left side and the pentle, etc., so that it can be restored to its original state by exchanging or repairing it.