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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On April 8, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a general fire insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with respect to the instant building “A” and “B” (hereinafter “instant building”) from April 8, 2013 to April 8, 2014, with respect to the insurance coverage amounting to KRW 140,000,000 (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”). The Plaintiff is a manufacturer who manufactured the composite flag installed within the instant building (hereinafter “instant composite”).

B. A, while operating a camera in the instant building, installed and used the instant complex on the books of the office located in the said building. On November 25, 2013, at around 12:00, a fire occurred in the foregoing complex term, which was in the office where A was on the outside, and the said complex term, part of the instant building, house fixtures, equipment, etc. were destroyed (hereinafter “the instant fire”).

C. On November 26, 2013, the Chungcheong Police Station, which investigated the instant fire, closed the internal investigation on the grounds that it was not possible to find out any doubt about fire prevention or fire-fighting of the said accident. After completing damage assessment, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,056,184 as insurance money to A as compensation for damage caused by the instant fire in accordance with the instant insurance contract on December 26, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is obligated to pay damages to the plaintiff, since the fire of this case occurred due to the internal defect or the defect in the manufacturing process of the complex of this case, including the internal defect or the defect in the manufacturing process of the complex of this case, the defendant bears the product liability, and the plaintiff acquired the victim's claim for damages in accordance with Article 682 of the Commercial Act by paying insurance money to the victim A

As to this, the Defendant did not prove that the fire extinguishing source of this case was the complex of this case, and the fire of this case is exclusively owned by the manufacturer.