1. The appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed;

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant (appointed party).

1. The grounds for appeal by the defendant (appointed party) and the appointed party of the first instance judgment are not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance court, and the evidence submitted in the first instance court is deemed legitimate even if the evidence submitted in this court is added to the evidence submitted in this court.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the judgment under the following paragraph (2).

2. The Defendant (Appointed) and the Defendant’s Appointor asserts that the instant accident incurred damages, such as the repair cost of the Defendant’s vehicle, the amount equivalent to 2.5 million won for the repair period, the amount equivalent to the rental fee for the Defendant’s vehicle, and the damages, etc. to the goods on which the Defendant’s vehicle was loaded (such as the board for forklift and the board for repair).

The burden of proof on the occurrence of damages and the amount of damages caused by the accident in this case lies on the defendant (appointed party) and the defendant (appointed party).

① Even until two years have passed since the date of the instant accident, the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Defendant Appointor did not repair the Defendant vehicle until the date of the occurrence of the instant accident. However, each of the entries in the evidence Nos. 1-2 and 3 (W/C) alone is insufficient to recognize the damage, such as the written estimate, caused to the Defendant vehicle due to the instant accident, and the amount of the damage therefrom, and ② the entries in the evidence Nos. 1-4 through 11 are insufficient to recognize the damage to the goods loaded on the Defendant vehicle due to the instant accident, and the amount of damage therefrom are insufficient to recognize the damage and the amount of damage. In light of the above, it is difficult to recognize the Plaintiff’s insurance money and the liability for damage against the Defendant Appointor

Therefore, the above argument by the defendant (appointed party) and the defendant Appointor is without merit.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed as it is without merit.