1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of B-si (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff’s vehicle), and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement for C-si (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant’s vehicle).

B. Around 00:59 on January 10, 2015, the driver of the Defendant vehicle driven the Defendant vehicle, who violated the signal at a distance of 103 square meters from the 1st place of the Dong community service center located in Dobong-gu Seoul, Dobong-gu, Seoul, to the front part of the Plaintiff vehicle’s front part of the front part of the Defendant vehicle, which was driven from the right side of the Defendant vehicle to the front part of the front part of the Defendant vehicle with the front part of the front part of the Defendant vehicle, which was driven by the front part of the driver’s room of the

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

Due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was damaged to the extent of KRW 4,017,00 for the repair cost. Among them, KRW 1,959,00 for the 1,95,000 for the Plaintiff’s personal taxi transport business association affiliated with the Plaintiff, and the remainder of KRW 2,050,000 for the 2,050 for the Plaintiff’s personal taxi transport business association affiliated with the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant repair cost”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 6 (including each number in case of additional number), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above recognition of the liability for damages, the accident in this case appears to have occurred by the whole negligence of the driver of the defendant vehicle who violated the signal at the intersection. Thus, the defendant, who is the mutual aid business operator of the defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused by the damage of the plaintiff vehicle

3. Scope of liability for damages

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is responsible for compensating the plaintiff for the full amount of KRW 2,050,000 for the repair cost of this case. Accordingly, the defendant is responsible for compensating the plaintiff. Since the value of the plaintiff's vehicle at the time of the accident of this case is KRW 1,375,067 and the repair cost of this case exceeds the exchange value of the plaintiff's vehicle, the defendant is remaining after deducting the scrap metal from the above KRW 1,375,067.