1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is an insurer who operates the gas station located C (hereinafter “instant gas station”). Defendant B is an insurer who purchased liability insurance with Defendant B related to the gas station business, etc.

The Plaintiff is the owner of EMW 320D car (hereinafter referred to as “instant vehicle”) that uses light oil as fuel.

B. On September 4, 2016, around 16:35, the Plaintiff requested the gas station of this case without designating a kind of oil in order to oil to oil to the instant vehicle. On the other hand, other employees, who were not the employees who used to oil to the gas station, provided gasoline in the state that the instant vehicle was on the operation of the train.

(hereinafter “instant mixed high school”). C.

Of the gas stations, the Plaintiff’s husband, who is not the Plaintiff’s “F” but the Plaintiff’s husband suspended the gas immediately. However, on the instant vehicle, the gasoline amounting to 18.44L was already oil.

On September 4, 2016, the Plaintiff entered the instant vehicle into the Baban Service Center for repair, and there was a dispute between the Defendant and the Defendant Company regarding the scope of repair due to the instant mixed high schools.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff spent KRW 8,30,140 to replace parts of the instant vehicle, such as fuel pen, high voltage pumps, high voltage pumps, and fuel tank. On September 23, 2016, the instant vehicle was released.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 5, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the employee of the gas station of this case is obliged to verify fuel used by the vehicle that is used by the person engaged in the oil station as a person engaged in the oil station, and pay gasoline to the vehicle of this case that uses light oil as fuel in violation of this duty despite the duty of care to pay fuel corresponding thereto. Thus, since the instant mixed oil accident occurred, Defendant B is the above employee.