1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Defendant A and the interesting fire marine insurance company shall be revoked, and the revoked part shall be revoked.

1. The scope of this Court’s judgment against the primary Defendant A and the interesting fire, and against the Defendant A’s possessor of the structure, the Defendant’s interesting fire claimed damages from the fire as the insurer of the Defendant A, and against the conjunctive Defendant B, the Plaintiff claimed damages from the owner of the structure.

It is recognized that there is a relation of subjective preliminary co-litigation that is legally incompatible and the need for its unity is recognized, so only Defendant A, interesting country fire, filed an appeal against the first instance judgment.

Even if the part of the claim against the conjunctive defendant B is also excluded from the confirmation, and it is transferred to the appellate court and is subject to the judgment of this court.

2. Basic facts

A. (1) The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a fire insurance contract setting the insurance period from August 7, 2014 to August 6, 2015 with respect to the above store buildings, facilities, etc., between D and D owned by the head of the Dong-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City C building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) on August 7, 2014.

(2) On May 14, 2014, Defendant A leased Nos. 205 and 305 of the instant commercial building, and operated the DNA Kafe (hereinafter “E”) with the trade name “E” at the said store from that time.

(3) The Defendant interesting fire is an insurer who concluded a business liability and fire insurance contract with Defendant A regarding the instant burial.

(4) On July 11, 2011, Defendant B acquired the ownership of the instant commercial building 205, and transferred the said ownership to F on January 20, 2015.

B. (1) On December 13, 2014, the occurrence of the instant fire, around 22:31, 2014, a fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) occurred in the rest room and material storage on the second floor of the E burial operated by Defendant A (hereinafter “the rest room and material storage”), and as a result, the section for common use on the first and fifth floor of the instant building was damaged to be flame.