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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that runs various insurance business, such as non-life insurance business, and is an insurer that entered into a contract for product liability insurance with Green Baco Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party company”) around June 30, 201.

B. On January 26, 2012, around 09:02, a fire occurred in the boiler room of the first floor A (hereinafter “the boiler room of Eunpyeong-gu”) of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “the instant boiler room”), and the gas temperature boiler of B (hereinafter “the instant boiler”) installed there was an accident in which the boiler room and the outer wall of the boiler room were destroyed by fire, and the boiler room, etc. were destroyed by fire and the accident occurred.

(hereinafter “instant fire”). C.

The boiler of this case, which was manufactured and sold by the non-party company, was installed in the boiler room of this case around October 2006 by Samman C&C corporation.

The Plaintiff presumed that the instant fire was caused by the defect in the boiler, and paid KRW 28,500,000 to B on July 16, 2012 under the said liability insurance contract concluded with the Nonparty Company as insurance money for the said property damage.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 4 evidence, Eul 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff 1’s assertion was attached to the wall that was built on a wooden fireproof wall in preparation for fire risks as a gas boiler. At the same time, one of the other boiler was installed on the bottom of the boiler of the instant case, and each of the said boiler was installed on the bottom of the said boiler, and the said boiler was installed at a level that it did not meet the boiler installation standards. On the back of the boiler of the instant case, the Plaintiff 1 was installed at the panel of the instant boiler, where the heat of the boiler was exposed to the outside, and the risk of fire was high.

However, the defendant is an urban gas business operator who has installed the gas boiler safely in compliance with the installation standards, and if necessary, corrective measures.