The Plaintiff produced and sold Buddhist goods, etc. with the trade name “E” in Kimhae-si D.

On February 18, 2016, the Defendant visited the world of “G” in the name of “G” operated by Kimhae-si F to determine whether the reproduction of plastic products at that place can be recycled by leaving the smell of smoke that occurs after putting it in the place.

On February 18, 2016, at around 10:30, a fire in G was moved to the Plaintiff’s workplace and a tank, fire, gold, etc. located in the Plaintiff’s workplace and the Plaintiff’s workplace.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant fire”. 【The Plaintiff’s assertion of the following facts: (a) there was no dispute with the Plaintiff; (b) the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (c) the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the entire pleadings; and (d) the instant fire occurred due to negligence, which was not completely extinguishing after attaching plastic products while performing plastic sorting operations; (b) the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages amounting to KRW 514,795,725 [2,527,129, positive damages amounting to KRW 245,527,129 [39,213,408, KRW 22,473,558, KRW 222,136,281, KRW 281].

Judgment

The entries and images of Gap 3, 4, 6, 8, 13, and 18 (including all household numbers) are insufficient to recognize that the fire of this case occurred due to the defendant's negligence, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, according to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the defendant was convicted of a fine of KRW 7 million in the first instance court of the case prosecuted for the crime of realization (Seoul District Court 2017Kadan1029). However, in the appellate court, the defendant remains in plastics in light of the content of plastic screening work that the defendant was guilty, the time when plastic was put to fire, the interval between time and fire, and the characteristics of plastic burning.