A. Around February 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a storage contract with the Defendant to receive custody fees of KRW 60,000 for the Defendant’s 40 square meters and KRW 18,750 for the Defendant’s worship at the low temperature storage store located in the Yannam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Seoul-do, and the 35 square meters.

B. From February 10, 2014 to May 27, 2014, the Plaintiff stored 13,750 nets (41,250 renunciations) in a low temperature storage warehouse of 40 square meters (41,250 renunciations) during the said distribution, and the remaining 5,00 nets (15,00 renunciations) in a 35 square low temperature storage warehouse, respectively.

C. On May 27, 2014, the Defendant: (a) sold 2,700 nets of 5,000, which were stored in a low temperature storage warehouse of 40 square meters to the Plaintiff, to the 13,750 nets of 13,750 square meters; and (b) sold 2,700 nets of 5,00 square meters stored in a low temperature storage warehouse of 35 square meters to the merchants located in Seoul; and (c) the remaining 2,300 nets were not shipped.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, testimony of Gap witness of the first instance court and purport of whole pleadings

2. Article 160 of the Commercial Act provides, “The warehouse business operator shall not be relieved of liability for damages from any loss of or damage to the deposited goods unless he/she proves that he/she or his/her employees have not neglected care in connection with the custody of the deposited goods.” The main text of Article 162(1) of the Commercial Act provides, “The warehouse business operator shall not demand payment of the storage charge, other expenses and substituted donation for another person unless he/she delivers the deposited goods.”

In light of the above provisions, as seen earlier, the worship 13,750 nets kept in the health room and the 40th low temperature storage warehouse was destroyed and discarded, and it was proved that the Plaintiff did not neglect to pay attention to the storage of the distribution of the deposited goods only with the testimony of the witness E of the first instance court.