beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 17,881,060 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from January 26, 2016 to August 16, 2016, and the following.
Reasons
1. In addition to the description of the claim, the description of the “reasons for Claim” and “a modified cause of Claim” are as follows.
2. Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act of the judgment by publication.
3. The portion to be dismissed: Where an article is damaged by a tort of KRW 15 million due to a fall in the market price, the damage shall be deemed to be the repair cost if it is possible to repair it, and where it is impossible to repair it, the decrease in exchange value shall be deemed ordinary damages; where it is possible to repair it, the damage resulting from a fall in a fall in exchange value in addition to the repair cost
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da115298, Dec. 11, 2014). Whether a part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was impossible to repair even after the completion of repair, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that there was a part of the repair being impossible even after the completion of repair by only the descriptions and images of the health class, A’s evidence and evidence Nos. 1 through 10 (including the number of branches), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
In addition, it is difficult to view that the degree of the damage of the vehicle (see also the 7th page photograph of the president), the repair part, and the repair cost (as approximately KRW 7.5 million), which can be known by the evidence mentioned above, has reduced the exchange value as a matter of course due to the repair.
Even if it is assumed that the value of the exchange has decreased, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff did not prove the reduced value of the exchange even though the court urged the verification, and that the reduced value of the exchange constitutes a special damage, and that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone constitutes a special damage, and that the Defendant knew or could have known the fact that the value of the Plaintiff’s vehicle would naturally reduce the value of the Plaintiff’s vehicle
Therefore, this part of the claim is without merit.
4. Amount quoted: 17,881,060 won = 32,881,060 won - 15 million won.