2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with the insured Non-Party CWnB Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Non-Party CWnB”) regarding B vehicles owned by the said company (hereinafter “Plaintiff”)

B. On February 28, 2013, an accident occurred, 1.2 meters high in the height of 133.58 square meters of a single-story housing unit 133.58 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s housing”) owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant’s housing”).

C. On March 2, 2013, around 15:43, the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the side of the Defendant’s house hushesium. On February 27, 2013, the Plaintiff reported that, around February 28, 2013, the Plaintiff caused an accident (hereinafter “instant accident”).

By March 13, 2013, the Plaintiff paid 456,890 won to the repair company at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant insurance proceeds”).

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, entries and images of Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to the defect in the Defendant’s house, and the Plaintiff asserted that, by paying the instant insurance proceeds, the Nonparty Company subrogatedly acquired the right to claim damages equivalent to the instant insurance proceeds that the Defendant had against the Defendant by subrogation. Accordingly, the Defendant asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff’s claim based on the different premise was unjust, since the Plaintiff’s vesium at the time of the collapse of the Defendant’s house did not exist in the place of accident

나. 판단 을 제1호증, 을 제2호증, 을 제6호증의 1, 2의 각 기재, 갑 제9호증의 1, 2의 각 영상, 당심 증인 E의 증언, 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 2013. 2. 28. 새벽 05:00경 피고 주택에 거주하고 있었던 임차인 E은 ‘쾅’ 소리에 놀라 밖에 나가 피고 주택...