손해배상(기)
1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
purport, purport, and.
1. The reasons for the court's explanation of this case are as follows: "the plaintiff to the fifth sentence from the third fourth sentence of the judgment of the first instance to "the plaintiff"; "the plaintiff to the third fifth sentence to "the plaintiff"; "the plaintiff to the third fifth sentence to "the plaintiff"; "the plaintiff to the third fifth" to "the plaintiff to keep"; "the head office" to the third half multiplied by the sixth one; "the party to the second half" to "the party to the second and third evidence may not have any dispute" to "the whole purport of arguments"; "the deduction must be made" to "the whole purport of arguments" to the second and third evidence to "the deduction must be made" to "the defendant must be deducted from the second and third evidence to the court of the first instance"; and it is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the first instance except for adding the following judgment to the argument that the defendant newly claims or emphasizes the second sentence to the court of the first instance to see it as is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. The first instance court's argument that the assessment of damages was erroneous is based on the following facts or circumstances: (a) 100 households stored in the warehouse of this case as the fire of this case; (b) 140 households which were displayed and stored in the warehouse of this case; (c) 80 households which were displayed and stored in the store of this case in the second floor of the building of this case; and (d) 20 households which were displayed and stored in the store of this case in the second floor of the building of this case, and 80 households which were displayed and stored in the store of this case, and the exchange price of individual households at the time of damage was not examined; and (e) on the ground that the defendant prepared, the judgment was based on the following facts or circumstances: (e) Gap evidence Nos. 3-1 through 3; and (e) Gap evidence Nos. 3-1 to 4; and (e) the fact that the defendant was a fire employee of this case.