2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On January 5, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a fire insurance contract with B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) and B, as the subject matter of the insurance, with the total purchase amount of KRW 4.267 billion, and the fire insurance contract with the insurance period from January 5, 2012 to January 5, 2013 (hereinafter “instant fire insurance contract”).

B. The Defendant entered into a contract between L and L to set up one type of Aluminium (referring to Dozin; hereinafter “the instant Dozin”) in the instant plant and succeeded to the status of B as the contractor while performing the construction work.

C. A fire on the second floor of the instant factory around March 9, 2012 (hereinafter “instant first fire”) around 06:18, 2012 relating to a fire on March 9, 2012.

(2) On March 9, 2012, the fire station of the Incheon Fire Agency, which: (a) destroyed the second floor of the instant plant, gold and pipes; (b) entered the fire site inspection report of the fire station of the Incheon Fire Agency, stating that “the fire station of the Seoul Fire Agency, which destroyed a fire, found the cause of the fire as follows: (c) it was found that the string contained in the gold water tank, was found to have been scattered; (d) the string contained in the gold water tank, and the string of the container, which was witnessed in the operation (ON) for a long time.”

3. Upon the Plaintiff’s request, the Korea Damage Evaluation Co., Ltd. presumed the cause of fire in the damage evaluation report to be mechanical factors. “The first floor and the second floor of the instant factory at the time of the instant first fire, and the third floor were leased to other companies and used as a gold factory. The fire was completed by the mechanical installation company and set off, and the two employees were removed from the factory after all of the inside of the factory.