1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. Costs arising from an appeal and an incidental appeal shall be respectively.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with C with respect to D vehicles owned by it (hereinafter “instant vehicle”), and the Defendant is running the automobile maintenance business, etc. with the trade name “F” in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City E.

B. When DE warning, etc. was issued on the driver’s seat plate of the instant vehicle, C left the repair of the said vehicle to the Defendant on November 18, 2016.

C. On November 21, 2016, the Defendant exchanged the engine exhauster and the engine exhauster of the instant vehicle. On November 24, 2016, around 09:10, there was an accident in which part of the said vehicle was destroyed due to a fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) on the lower side of the said vehicle.

On January 17, 2017, the Plaintiff paid 8,700,000 won of the instant vehicle repair cost due to the instant fire to C as insurance proceeds.

E. In relation to the cause of the fire in this case, the Incheon Southern Fire Station, which investigated the scene immediately after the fire in this case, presented opinions that it is presumed that the engine room’s internal heat and distribution form is recognizable, and that the engine protection material and fire-fighting in the lower part of the device installed to reduce air pollutants emitted from the vehicle from the DPF (power reduction device) is recognizable, and that in the DPF, there is an identification of the burning machine on the parts connected to the exhauster’s engine, there is an identification of a white powder and damaged part of the exhauster presumed to be the dPF pen’s ingredients from the last part of the vehicle after the vehicle is identified. In light of the fact that the exhaust gas infection in the high temperature, which was leaked by the heat generated from the heat generated from the malfunction caused by the dPF malfunction, is presumed to have been generated by having contacted with the oil in the engine room and the engine protection materials at the time and engine materials.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 7, 10, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 3, Gap evidence 2, 6, 11, 12, Eul evidence 12, and Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, and the Incheon Southern fire Fighting Force of the court of the trial.