1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above part is revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 26, 2016, D driving a E (LF) E (LF) vehicle (hereinafter “instant LF vehicle”) on February 26, 2016, D caused an accident where the backer of the instant vehicle is damaged (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”) by shocking the backer of the H-owned I (AD3) vehicle parked in front of the Gsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan City F (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

B. On March 31, 2016, the Defendant, the insurer which had concluded the instant car comprehensive insurance with respect to the instant Maritime Vehicle, paid KRW 3,065,795 to H, the owner of the instant vehicle, at the repair cost of the back-hander of the instant vehicle.

C. H requested J (the head office of Jeonju) operated by the Plaintiff to conduct a glass painting construction of the instant vehicle.

On June 8, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement on the assignment of claims between H and H with the content of taking over the claim regarding the cost of free hosting construction among the claim for substitute water compensation held against the Defendant Company. On the same day, H sent a notice of the assignment of claims on behalf of H to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleadings

2. On December 18, 2015, H purchased the instant vehicle and completed the registration, immediately after the Plaintiff purchased the instant vehicle, H had the Plaintiff carry out the instant vehicle with a glass screen, and due to the instant traffic accident, the instant vehicle caused the damage to the back-setting part of the franchise.

Inasmuch as K-type glass painting has the characteristics that the entire construction should be carried out even in cases where partial damage is inflicted on the vehicle, the Defendant, the insurer of the instant L-type vehicle, shall pay KRW 2,900,000,000, which is the benefit-raising cost of the entire vehicle of this case, to the Plaintiff, who was transferred the right to claim for compensation for large-scale damage concerning the cost of hosting the glass cell from H.

3. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 13, H is the traffic accident of this case.