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. At around 15:00 on March 18, 2017, the Defendant: (a) caused the damage of the front and the rear glass window part of the Eran vehicle owned by the Plaintiff, which was parked there, by putting the stone (17 cm in length) on the floor at the D Museum parking lot located in Gyeong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun; and (b) caused the damage of the parts of the front and the rear glass window of the Eran vehicle owned by the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant act.” The reason was that the Plaintiff had expressed a desire to the Defendant’s wife while the Plaintiff had a dispute with the Defendant’s wife as a parking problem.

B. As the instant act, the Plaintiff suffered property damage equivalent to KRW 3,298,020 in total, including repair costs and vehicle towing costs, due to the damage of the front and rear glass, black boxes, etc. of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

C. The Defendant was indicted as a crime of causing property damage by the instant act, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million, and the judgment (Seoul District Court Tongwon Branch Decision 2017Da380, Nov. 28, 2017) became final and conclusive as it is.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 4-2, Eul evidence 4, Eul evidence 5, Eul evidence 7, the video of Eul evidence 7, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant, as a tort, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the money stated in the claim as compensation for property damage caused by the instant act.

B. The part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle damaged by the Defendant is the front and rear glass.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s property damage should be limited to KRW 550,00,000, the estimated amount of the repair cost for the front and rear glass.

In addition, since the Plaintiff expressed a desire to the Defendant’s wife and caused the instant act, the Plaintiff’s negligence should also be considered when calculating the amount of damages.

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the occurrence of damages liability and the fact of recognition of the above restriction, the defendant's act in this case constitutes a tort against the plaintiff, and the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused by the act in this case.

On the other hand.