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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The Plaintiff concluded a general fire insurance contract with the livestock industry cooperatives B (hereinafter “B livestock industry cooperatives”) on the buildings located in the B livestock industry C in the Chungcheongbuk-do (hereinafter “victim building”).

The defendant owns and operates the F (cafeteria) in neighboring E in a damaged building.

B. On September 21, 2015, a fire that could not identify the cause of the fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) occurred and the entire warehouse in F (hereinafter “instant warehouse”) and the inside and outer walls of the damaged building were destroyed by the inner and outer walls of the damaged building.

Accordingly, on December 10, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 185,589,648 as insurance money for the damaged building to the Livestock Cooperatives.

C. The warehouse of this case, which was behind the F building, is the first floor of the structure of the prefabricated sand position panel (a panel of shotle materials), and two freezing warehouses were installed both in the passage.

The damaged building is a three-story building of reinforced concrete structure slive slive roof.

The fire site investigation report (hereinafter referred to as the "fire site investigation report of this case") prepared by the Cheongbuk-do D fire station in which the fire of this case was destroyed and investigated is classified as the heat sources of the fire of this case, the fire extinguishing factors, the first cargo, the fire extinguishing-related equipment, the products, and the power sources, respectively, as a result of the on-site investigation, and the fire site investigation report of this case appears to have been rapidly burned by the assembly-type panel and the combustible materials in the warehouse of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, Gap evidence 2-1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the fire of this case was emitted from the warehouse managed by the Defendant, and thus, the fire of this case was caused by the Defendant’s negligence, or at least prefabricated-type teams and combustible materials in the warehouse of this case.