1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is the owner of the Plaintiff’s vehicle B, EW, EWH (the first registration date; November 22, 2012; hereinafter “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) and the Defendant Company is the insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the owner of the vehicle C (hereinafter “Defendant”) with respect to the vehicle C (hereinafter “Defendant”).

On September 30, 2015, the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle caused a traffic accident shocking the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was parked while driving the Defendant’s vehicle on the alleyway in the Dong-dong, Busan (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”).

As a result of the instant traffic accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle accepted the left-hand regr, the left-hand regr, the left-hand regrat (exchange), the left-hand regrat (exchange), etc.

The Defendant Company paid KRW 3,030,600 in total with the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (official fee and parts).

[Ground] The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the cause of claim as to the Plaintiff’s assertion of the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal as to Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the exchange value of Plaintiff’s vehicle decreased to KRW 1,510,00 due to the instant traffic accident. The Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to KRW 330,000 due to the issuance of the appraisal report, and thus, the Defendant Company, the insurer of Defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate the Plaintiff

The amount of damages when the property owned by the relevant law is damaged due to the tort shall be the cost of repair if it is possible to repair it, and if it is impossible to repair it, the reduced value of exchange shall be the normal amount of damages.

If parts remain even after repair remain, the reduced value of exchange due to impossibility of repair in addition to repair costs shall also constitute ordinary damages (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da52889, Nov. 13, 2001). However, where repair is possible, there is an empirical rule that considerable reduction of exchange value should govern in addition to repair costs.