1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the D flag (hereinafter “instant flag”) who is operating E (F) with construction machinery rental, etc. as its main business.

B. On December 20, 2013, Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) was awarded a contract for two removal works of a bridge protection facility (hereinafter “instant construction”) from NFFF Incheon Joint Markets (hereinafter “NFC”) as a corporation with the purpose of waste disposal business, etc.

Defendant C was the chief of the site of the Defendant Company, who was in charge of the safety at the construction site.

C. Defendant C leased the instant engine from the Plaintiff for the purpose of carrying out the work of unloading G digging machines (hereinafter referred to as “instant digging machines”) at the front wharf of NFFC located in Jung-gu, Incheon. From around 09:00 on September 12, 2014, Defendant C leased the instant engine to H, who is an operator of the mid-term engine, from September 12, 2014.

H around 10:57 on the same day, at least 10:57, installed a device that serves as a support unit for getting the load of the early string period of the instant early string period to the right side (sea side) above the left side (sea side) received more than the early string period. Accordingly, when entering the instant early string period, the string of the instant early string period exceeded the specified load of the instant early string period, and the string over several times.

Nevertheless, H continued to carry out the instant operations, and there was an accident that the instant season fells into a sandbars with approximately six meters lower than the scambling season (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

In the instant accident, it was destroyed that seawater was flooded in seawater so that it can not be used again.

E. H and Defendant C were suspected of causing property damage with respect to the instant accident, but they were subject to a disposition of non-prosecution (suspected) due to insufficient evidence to prove the intention of the damage, and Defendant C was subject to the instant disposition.