1. As to the accident described in the attached list 1, the plaintiff against the defendant based on the insurance contract stated in the attached list 2.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 14, 2014, the Defendant’s vehicle parked on the rear side (hereinafter “victim”) parked in the front line while driving the E-vehicle owned by the Vice Commissioner of Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant insured vehicle”) (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

B. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with respect to the instant insured vehicle owned by D as indicated in the attached Table 1 list.

C. After the accident, the Defendant entered the damaged vehicle into the maintenance shop, and used the 30-day rental car from the four sirens company from November 17, 2014 to December 17, 2014. The 30-day rental fee is a total of 36,560,760 won per day (= approximately 1,218,692 won per day).

On November 17, 2016, the damaged vehicle was released after the lapse of at least two months from the date of repair, such as a spread exchange, painting, etc., after being put into storage by the business entity of the "F" after the accident.

E. According to the Plaintiff’s automobile insurance clauses applicable to the instant insurance contract, the standard amount of recognition is determined as follows: (a) where a non-business motor vehicle needs to be used instead of another motor vehicle during the period when it is destroyed or damaged and operated; and (b) where it is possible to repair it, it is determined as follows: “The ordinary charges required for leasing the same kind of motor vehicle” and “the period shall be the period until the repair is completed and shall be within the limit of 30 days.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, 6, Eul 5, 5, 6 Eul 5, 6 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul 7, 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of the parties concerned did not destroy the damaged vehicle due to the instant accident, thus lending and borrowing fees.