The judgment of the first instance, including any claims added by this Court, shall be modified as follows:

Defendant corporation.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) leased and used a G Dong with a total floor area of 396m2 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant Company warehouse”) from D among the warehouse of the 1st floor of the steel framed roof of Gwangju-si and F (hereinafter “instant warehouse”) which is owned by D, and H used an I Dong with a total floor area of 347m2 in the immediate adjacent to the Defendant Company’s warehouse (hereinafter “H warehouse”).

B. The Plaintiff entered into a L insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with J, which is the subject matter of insurance, setting the insurance period from November 1, 2016 to November 11, 2019, and setting the purchase amount of insurance as KRW 200,000,000, respectively (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

C. A fire (hereinafter “fire”) occurred in the instant warehouse on August 25, 2018, around 8:58, in which the instant warehouse was relocated, and the outer wall of the Plaintiff’s building near the instant warehouse was destroyed by a loss.

On October 22, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,453,001 to the insured J in accordance with the instant insurance contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-5, Eul evidence No. 10-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) According to the result of the investigation of the cause of the fire in the sports light fire station, the instant fire can be deemed to have occurred in the Defendant Company’s warehouse, not the H warehouse.

As the owner of a warehouse of a defendant corporation, the defendant corporation illegally extended the warehouse of the defendant corporation and constructed a temporary building in the vicinity of the defendant corporation. The defendant corporation, as the possessor, did not fulfill its duty to take protective measures, such as storing inflammable substances in the above warehouse and not thoroughly managing them. Accordingly, the fire of this case occurred due to defects in the construction or preservation of the warehouse of the defendant corporation.