beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. B is the owner of reinforced concrete structure and cement brick structure sloping roof, detached house and first-class neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “instant building”) located in Gyeongbuk-gun C, and the Plaintiff is the son of B, and the Defendant is an insurance company.
B. On February 12, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded an insurance contract with the Defendant with the following content that, if damage to the instant building was incurred due to a fire, the Defendant would be compensated for such damage.
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant insurance contract”). The insurance coverage period of 1402 Securities and Exchange (Design Number) No. D (Design Number) No. 1402 on February 12, 2014 to February 12, 2029 (15 years) insurance subject matter of the Plaintiff’s insurance policy, and the structure of the subject matter of the Plaintiff’s insurance contract and the columns of the building of the amount of the insurance coverage: The steel-framed reinforced concrete structure: The walls outside the slve roof: All of the inventory assets (the second floor air conditioners, etc.) of the wall 10 million won (the second floor air conditioners, etc.) of the wall 30 million won of the wall / block, etc.
C. On March 3, 2014, 200 days after the conclusion of the instant insurance contract, around 01:50, the fire occurred on the first floor of the instant building and partly destroyed the inside of the building (hereinafter “instant fire”), and the amount of damages of the instant building caused by the said fire is KRW 43 million.
On March 4, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the payment of insurance proceeds from the instant fire. However, the Defendant rejected the payment of insurance proceeds on the ground that the instant fire was caused by the Plaintiff’s fire, and on April 15, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant building was in a position prior to the conclusion of the instant insurance contract, and that the Plaintiff did not notify the Defendant thereof, and notified the Plaintiff that the instant insurance contract was terminated.
E. On the other hand, the fire of this case.