A. On May 28, 2015, Defendant A entered into an automobile insurance contract with the Plaintiff as the insured with respect to D business cargo vehicles owned by himself/herself (hereinafter “insured vehicles”).

(hereinafter “instant insurance contract”. According to the instant insurance contract, the Plaintiff, the insured, was to compensate within the limit of KRW 200 million per accident, as to the damages incurred by either removing or damaging another person’s property due to an insured motor vehicle accident that occurred while A owns, uses, and manages an insured motor vehicle.

B. From November 15, 2015, the occurrence of an accident in which a fire occurred in the car goods store located in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, which was owned by Defendant B, due to the occurrence of a fire, and the container and the automobile goods stored in that place were destroyed.

(hereinafter “instant fire”). C.

On November 20, 2015, at around 30:30:0 p.m. on Nov. 15, 2015, Defendant A left a place to park an insured motor vehicle in the vicinity of Jung-gu Incheon, Jung-gu, Incheon, and caused a fire by taking a spak.

“The Plaintiff claimed insurance money.”

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, and 8, Eul's partial entry of evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. In light of the fact that the fire may not be excluded from the possibility of the occurrence of fire due to the peculiar characteristics of the electric equipment used at the bottom of the Plaintiff’s alleged container, there is no electrical characteristics on the rear wheels of the insured motor vehicle, and the possibility that the fire may occur because the flames cannot be ruled out from the bottom of the container during the work of the oxygen cutting machine, the insured motor vehicle cannot be deemed to have caused the fire by taking an electrical container, and it is merely presumed that the fire was caused by the damage to the clothes of the oxygen or electricity line.

Therefore, the plaintiff is related to the fire of this case.