1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 1,982,00 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto, from June 20, 2013 to April 22, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff asserted that the vehicle owned by the Plaintiff was damaged by the Defendant in the first instance trial, and claimed repair costs, borrowing and lending costs, and consolation money against the Defendant on the ground of tort.

The court of first instance accepted the plaintiff's above repair costs and loan costs, and sentenced the first instance court to dismiss the claim of consolation money, and only the defendant appealed against this part of the loss.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff did not object to the part against the Plaintiff, and filed an incidental appeal that added the claim for damages equivalent to the decrease in the exchange value of the vehicle, thereby expanding the purport of the claim.

Therefore, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the plaintiff's repair cost, loan cost and the part of the plaintiff's incidental claim for damages for decrease in the exchange value of the above vehicle.

2. Basic facts

A. On February 27, 2013, the Defendant carried out melting and removing melting the steel bars of the protective walls of D and E upper slabb (hereinafter referred to as “melting and removing”) at the construction site of Section 7 Section (hereinafter referred to as “the construction site of this case”).

B. At that time, a large quantity of green removal systems used for green removal operations were spreaded on the parts of the body part of the FF Round flue Cargo (vehicle registration on November 5, 2012, hereinafter “victim”) that was parked in the temporary parking lot at the construction site at the same time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry or video of Gap 1 through 4, and 9 (if there are additional numbers, including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) or the purport of the whole pleadings

3. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The Plaintiff 1’s assertion that the green removal materials used for the Green Removal Work in the instant case were scattered into the damaged vehicle, and thus, the said vehicle became unusable due to its corrosion and damage.

The plaintiff is to repair the above vehicle.