A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a fire insurance contract with A on February 10, 2014 with the following contents. The Defendant is a manufacturing company of a cold and hot blast (hereinafter “instant cold and hot blast”) established in the beauty room in the name of “C” operated on the first floor of the pertinent insurance purpose building by the insured Party B (hereinafter “instant beauty room”).

[Contents The content of an insurance contract] Insurance type: The location of a large-scale large-scale large-scale large-scale large-scale large-scale large-scale large-type large-type large-type large-type large-type medium-type large-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type medium-type

B. A fire within the beauty art room of this case (hereinafter “instant fire”) around April 14, 2015, around 18:56, around April 14, 2015.

2) On May 26, 2015, E.C. 2 determined that the amount of damages to the Plaintiff was KRW 52,44,786 in total, including KRW 11,509,056, KRW 6,567, KRW 123, KRW 24,929, KRW 607, KRW 607, KRW 6,589,000, KRW 100,00, KRW 100, and KRW 52,44,786.

3) Accordingly, on April 23, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 48,85,786 (the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,00,000,00,000 as insurance money, and KRW 38,85,786, May 27, 2015, including KRW 20,000 as insurance money, and KRW 38,85,786 as insurance amount for the damage of movable property among the above amount of damage assessment) to B. [In the absence of any dispute over a part of the grounds for recognition, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,14,15, and the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff of the parties concerned caused the fire of this case due to the defect of the cold and hot wave of this case, and the defendant is responsible for compensating the plaintiff B for the damages under the Product Liability Act. The defendant paid the insurance money to the plaintiff Eul and the damages for delay.