logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원밀양지원 2019.07.17 2018가단2341
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 9, 2018, the Plaintiff left the Defendant, who operates a motor vehicle maintenance business, to repair the BMW750 motor vehicle (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) owned by himself/herself.

B. The Defendant dismantled the engine and failed to complete the repair of the instant vehicle while repairing the instant vehicle. The instant vehicle was repaired by the D Changwon Service Center, and the repair cost of KRW 28,615,510 was incurred.

C. From October 14, 2018 to November 23, 2018, the Plaintiff, who was unable to use the instant vehicle, incurred 4 million won by using sirens.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff had no capacity to repair the breakdown of the instant vehicle, but has damaged the engine while repairing the engine.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the repair cost and the rental car cost of KRW 32,615,510 (=the repair cost of KRW 28,615,510) and damages for delay.

B. Determination Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and Eul evidence No. 1, together with the purport of the entire arguments, include the following circumstances, namely, ① in the column for “the verification of the cause of the instant vehicle” among the estimates for checking and confirming the instant vehicle installed at the D Changwon Service Center, and ② in the written opinion of review on the cause of the engine damage of the instant vehicle prepared by the vehicle engineer E, the written opinion of review on the ground of the engine damage of the instant vehicle, stating that “the Plaintiff had been damaged by the stonal exposure damage during the course of filling the vehicle without repairing the engine for a considerable period of time, and it is difficult to find relevance between the Defendant’s repair work and the engine damage.”

arrow