beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 3, 2017, the Plaintiff leased C’s siren (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) to the Defendant during the period from July 3, 2017 to July 18:00 to July 6, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease”).
B. At around 15:00 on July 4, 2017, the Defendant: (a) caused an accident to shock the curbstones adjacent to the road while driving the said vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).
C. Meanwhile, at the time of the conclusion of the above lease agreement, the Defendant subscribed to the vehicle damage exemption clause with the maximum of 4 million won.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3 evidence, Eul 2 and 4 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. According to the above facts acknowledged as above, the defendant is liable for damages sustained by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.
B. 1) The parties’ assertion (1) that the Plaintiff is liable for repair costs. The Plaintiff suffered losses from D’s payment of KRW 6.75 million at the repair cost of the instant vehicle.
(A) (No. 4, 5). (2) Defendant: The amount stated in the quotation (No. 1) that the Defendant received from D was KRW 9,296,725, but the Defendant changed the phrase that the Defendant repaired only the case without replacing the franchise when the repair was completed. After the repair was completed, the Defendant issued 7,229,803 repair cost claim (No. 3).
However, in the repair cost claim (No. 3), the U.S. component (3,297,690 won) which had no written estimate (Evidence No. 1) has been destroyed. The above details are inconsistent with the written estimate of the insurance repair cost (Evidence No. 4) submitted by the Plaintiff.
Considering such circumstances, the Plaintiff made a false quotation (Evidence A 4) in collusion with D in order to claim repair costs of at least four million won, the limit of exemption, and thus, cannot be trusted.
B) (1) Determinations (1) No. 4 shall include 7,404,219 won in total as 4,168,200 won in case of a public service specified in the evidence No. 4,562,908, and part No. 4,168,200 won in case of a part.