(2) The Plaintiff concluded a fire insurance contract (20,00,000 won during the insurance period from April 8, 201 to April 8, 2014) with respect to the entire building of this case, including the studio and the fire accident of this case, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,876,942 as insurance money to B on September 26, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3's evidence 1-2, 4, 5-1-9, Eul evidence 1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. According to the appraisal result of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the accident of this case occurred as a result of the Defendant’s failure to perform his duty of due care as a good manager, and as a result, the Defendant is liable to compensate for damages caused by the accident of this case to B.

Therefore, the plaintiff who paid insurance money to B is seeking the payment of the above amount against the defendant on behalf of B.

B. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion is not only unaware of the instant accident, but also the network D, which had been residing in the studio of the instant case, is the son of the Plaintiff and the F, and as at the time of the conclusion of the said lease, the network D was merely 16 years old and became the lessee in the name of the Defendant, and its substance is the legal representative.

In fact, the network D was directly prepared as a monthly rent, and the lessor was aware that the network D was a real resident, and the renewal or renewal was made between the lessor and the network D after the termination of the above lease contract.

Therefore, even if the subject is liable for damages arising from the accident of this case, the subject is not the defendant, but the actual lessee D.

3. Determination

A. Studio of this case