1. Defendant B’s KRW 28,181,123 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from April 11, 2012 to July 5, 2014, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff entered into a housing fire insurance contract with C by setting the insurance period from November 24, 201 to November 24, 2012 with respect to multi-family houses with the Daegu North-gu D3 floor owned by C (E).

B. On February 23, 2012, around 04:05, Defendant B, who had resided in the above multi-family house 103 square meters (hereinafter “the instant house”) and was in his place of residence due to living height, etc., was in his place of residence and was in his place of residence, and was in his place of residence with a luxation with a 26 square meters and a luxation room, etc. among the 33 square meters of the instant house by attaching a luxation with a lux with a scheme for drinking and a luxation with a lux

(hereinafter referred to as “instant fire”). C.

On April 10, 2012, the Plaintiff paid C KRW 28,181,123 (i.e., the cost of removing the remainder of KRW 26,897,219 (the cost of removing the remainder of KRW 1,283,904).

With respect to the instant housing, the lease agreement was concluded as “a deposit of KRW 3 million on October 15, 201, monthly rent and management fee of KRW 300,000,000,000 from October 17, 2011 to October 16, 201, lessor C, and the Defendant”.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of the evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the entire pleadings (including the number of pages), and the purport of the whole pleadings (including the plaintiff and the defendant) deemed to have been led to confession under Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act (the grounds for Recognition) (the fact that there is no dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant)

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the facts of the recognition of the claim against Defendant B (1) liability for damages, Defendant B is liable to compensate for damages suffered by C by searching for the instant housing, etc. due to the instant fire pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act, as an illegal act setting a fire in the instant housing.

(2) The insurer’s subrogation fire of this case pays insurance money to C, and the Plaintiff who acquired the claim for damages by subrogation of the insurer under Article 682 of the Commercial Act, the Defendant B is liable to compensate for the damages incurred to C within the extent of the insurance amount the Plaintiff paid

B. Claim against Defendant A (1)