1. The part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of D vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”) and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the E vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. On October 9, 2014, the driver of the Defendant vehicle: (a) while driving the Defendant vehicle and parked on the road near Gyeonggi-gu Cheongyeong-gun, Gyeonggi-do, the driver of the Defendant vehicle: (b) caused the Plaintiff vehicle that was parked in the vicinity by stopping the accelerator with an engine; and (c) caused the Plaintiff vehicle to shock the front of the Defendant vehicle.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

As a result of the instant accident, the Plaintiff received repair of the sales and exchange, etc. due to the damage to the right-fluor, right-hand gluor, each side gluor, the right-hand gluor panel, and the gluor, etc., of the Plaintiff’s vehicle. The Defendant paid KRW 9,790,000 at its repair cost.

Plaintiff

Vehicles are vehicles first registered on April 9, 2013, and the value of damaged vehicles at the time of the instant accident is KRW 25,000,000.

E. Meanwhile, in the terms and conditions of the Defendant’s comprehensive automobile insurance contract [Attachment 2], the items of automobile price decline damage as of the criteria for payment of substitute damages include “in the event that the cost of repairing an automobile due to an accident (limited to a motor vehicle with two years or less after departure) exceeds 20% of the value of the automobile immediately preceding the accident, 15% of the cost of repairing shall be paid, and in the case of a motor vehicle with one year or more but less than two years after release, 10% of the cost of repairing shall be paid.”

(hereinafter referred to as the "Terms and Conditions Provisions of this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence 16-1 through 3, Gap evidence 20, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that the defendant, the insurer of the defendant vehicle, has a duty to compensate the plaintiff for the above damages, since the value of the plaintiff vehicle decreased by KRW 1,468,500 due to the accident in this case.

B. The insurer is the direct right of the victim to the insurer.