1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion is the owner of each motor vehicle indicated in the separate sheet 2 list and the vehicle number column, and the above motor vehicle was damaged and repaired due to a traffic accident by the defendant insured vehicle.

However, even after the repair of the plaintiffs' automobiles such as external board exchange, painting, and repair, there are parts that make it impossible to repair the outer board and the structural frame deterioration, noise and vibration increase, rapid corrosion, etc., and the existence of accident power alone, which cause a severe fall in the exchange value decline. Such damage constitutes ordinary damages caused by traffic accidents or a potential special damage.

Therefore, the defendant has a duty to pay to the plaintiffs the money stated in the purport of the claim by compensating for the decrease in the exchange value of the plaintiffs' vehicle or the decrease in the market price.

2. Determination

A. The amount of damages when the goods were damaged due to a tort shall be the cost of repair if it is possible to repair them, and, if it is impossible to repair them, the reduced exchange value shall be the ordinary amount of damages. If parts that cannot be partially repaired remain after repair, the reduced exchange value shall be the ordinary amount of damages in addition to the cost of repair.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da52889, Nov. 13, 2001). B.

In this case, as shown in the facts of the plaintiffs' assertion, evidence Nos. 1-5, A-2-4, A-4, A-4-4, A-5-6, A-6-4, A-7-4, A-8-4, A-9-4, A-10-4, A-10-5, A-12-4, A-12-5, 13-5, and A-14-5, and A-14, which are prepared at the request of the plaintiffs.