구상금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendant added a "additional judgment" as to the assertion added by the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable to cite it as it is in accordance
(However, the part against the joint defendant of the first instance court, which was separated, is excluded from the part against the fire insurance company of the same court).
A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that, in a case where a fire insurance that the lessee of a building purchased with the leased building for the purpose of insurance (hereinafter “Lessee’s fire insurance”) and the fire insurance that the owner of the building purchased with the building for the purpose of insurance (hereinafter “owner’s fire insurance”) are in a double insurance relationship with the owner as the insured, and where a fire occurred in a leased building due to the lessee’s fault, the insurer of the owner fire insurance is entitled to exercise the right to indemnity based on subrogation against the lessee only if the insurer of the owner’s fire insurance paid the total amount of damages to the owner with the insurance proceeds on the building. In this case, the Plaintiff did not pay the entire amount of damages to B as the insurance proceeds, and thus, it cannot exercise the right to indemnity based on subrogation against the Defendant as the lessee. However, there is no clear ground to permit the exercise of the right to indemnity only where the entire amount of damages is paid with the insurance proceeds (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da214529, Jan. 29, 2015).
B. The Defendant, without gross negligence, has the purport of the Act on the Responsibility for Fire-Fighting that enables limitation of liability, the Defendant’s provision of education and training for fire-fighting, and despite the Defendant’s initial efforts to extinguish the instant building which was constructed as materials easily burned, fire has been expanded, and the Defendant also suffered damage due to the instant fire.