1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of B K5 vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) on October 12, 201, the delivery date of which is October 12, 201, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle insurance contract”) with respect to C vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. D around August 15, 2013, around 21:50, an accident occurred where the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked in the instant parking lot located in the Candong in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. The Plaintiff, while repairing the Plaintiff’s vehicle through the Dowing Service Center, exchanged the rear and rear fences before and after the right, and the Defendant paid KRW 6,974,00 as insurance money on September 16, 2013.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the price of the plaintiff's vehicle was reduced by KRW 4,677,600 even after the repair due to the accident of this case, and thus, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for the damages.

B. In full view of the purport of the argument in each of the statements in evidence Nos. 3 and 5, the standard terms and conditions of the instant automobile insurance contract are as follows: (a) compensation for damage to automobile cleaning is limited to a motor vehicle with not more than two years after its release; (b) where the repair cost of the motor vehicle due to an accident exceeds 20% of the value of the motor vehicle immediately preceding its release, 15% of the repair cost is required for the motor vehicle with not more than one year but not more than two years after its release; and (c) 10% of the repair cost is required for the motor vehicle with not more than one year but not more than two years after its release; and (d) recognition of the fact that the notified tax of the Plaintiff’s vehicle immediately preceding the occurrence of the instant accident was 16,290,000, and as seen earlier, the date of delivery of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is October 12, 201; and (e) the date of the instant accident is August 15, 2013.