1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Chief;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who concluded a fire insurance contract with respect to the restaurant buildings (D; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the first floor among the third floor buildings on the ground of Nonparty B and Daegu Suwon-gu C, and the facilities and office fixtures, and the Defendant is the lessee of the beauty room who operates the beauty room (EH shop; hereinafter the same shall apply) in the first floor building among the above buildings.

B. On March 13, 2017, the occurrence of a fire accident and payment of the fire insurance money) the occurrence of a fire at the instant store on March 13, 2017, the occurrence of a fire, and the occurrence of a fire at the instant store, and the occurrence of a building, facilities, and fixtures attached to the instant store for insurance purposes located immediately adjacent to the instant store (hereinafter referred to as the fire accident in this case

(2) The Plaintiff paid the fire insurance amount of KRW 33,473,622 in total with respect to the damages caused by the damage to the building, etc. caused by the instant fire accident.

C. However, the instant fire accident occurred first from the boiler room operated by the Defendant to the boiler room in the instant store, and the Defendant is liable for compensating for the damages incurred by the said B as the possessor of the structure, etc. pursuant to Article 758 of the Civil Act.

Therefore, pursuant to Article 682 of the Commercial Act, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages against the Defendant by subrogation is reached.

2. Determination:

A. Legal principles refer to defects in the installation and preservation of a structure under Article 758(1) of the Civil Act refers to a state in which a structure fails to meet normal safety requirements according to its use. In determining whether such safety is satisfied, the determination shall be based on whether the installer and the preservation of the structure has fulfilled the duty to take protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the risk of the structure.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Da24499 delivered on January 14, 2005, etc.). Meanwhile, a structure is ordinary depending on its ordinary usage.