1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff A. against the defendant E who is equivalent to the following amount ordered to be paid:

1. Facts of recognition;

가. 피고 E이 운전하는 피고 C, D 소유의 G SM5 차량(이하 ‘피고 차량’이라 한다)이 2016. 5. 23. 전북 임실군 오수면 대명리 남악교차로 부근에서 안전거리를 확보하지 않은 채 남원 방면에서 전주 방면으로 진행하다가 앞서 가던 H 아반떼 차량을 충격하였고, 이에 위 아반떼 차량이 반대차로로 튕겨져 나가 전주 방면에서 남원 방면으로 진행 중이던 원고 B가 운전하는 원고 회사 소유의 F 덤프트럭(이하 ‘원고 차량’이라 한다)과 충돌하였다

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

Plaintiff

The Company disbursed 1,146,501 won (=J 10,746,501 won) in J and K as the repair cost for the Plaintiff Company’s vehicle construction cost of KRW 8,074,219, and as the part cost necessary for the repair (=J 400,000 won).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements or images, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as to Gap's statements, Gap's statements, 1 to 4, 7, 8, 10 to 12

2. Determination as to the claim of the Plaintiff Company

A. 1) According to the above fact of recognition of the claim against Defendant E, the instant accident occurred due to the negligence of Defendant E who driven the Defendant’s vehicle without ensuring the safety distance. As such, Defendant E is obligated to compensate for the damages suffered by the Plaintiff Company pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act. 2) The Plaintiff Company, Defendant C and D, as the owner of the Defendant vehicle, is responsible for compensating for the Plaintiff’s automobile repair cost and other damages equivalent to the depreciation damage caused by the instant accident pursuant to the Civil Act or the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (hereinafter “Automobile Compensation Act”).

In a case where an automobile operator is liable for damages under the Automobile Loss Compensation Act pursuant to Article 3 of the Murder Act, since the operation of the automobile causes the death or injury of another person due to the operation of the automobile, the physical damage caused by the operation of the automobile shall be made.