logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.11.14 2016가단26664
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the prefabricated Franchiste Panel Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned building”), and Defendant B is the owner of the adjacent E-building located in the Jeonju-gun, Jeonbuk-gun (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. At around June 20, 2016, Defendant B was living together with Defendant C at the instant building. At around 18:56 on the same day, at around 18:56, there was a fire that, in order to see that Defendant C would have boomed into the instant building, fluent substances around the instant building and that, as a result, fluents that were in the instant building and that were moved to the Plaintiff’s owned building (hereinafter “first fire”).

C. At around 19:40 on the same day, the former fire brigade called up after receiving the report of fire at around 18:58 on the same day, sent the first fire of this case, and then explained the situation where the first fire of this case was completely destroyed, and made it right to explain the situation where the first fire of this case was completely destroyed, and to check on-site observation and additional safety measures, and thereafter returned to the former fire brigade at around 20:48 on the same day.

However, around 23:44 on the same day after the 23:44 day from the date when the Jeonju Fire Brigade was broken down, the report was received that the fire (hereinafter “the second fire”) occurred in the Plaintiff’s owned building, and the said fire brigade was dispatched to the site at around 23:45, and confirmed that the fire occurred in the Plaintiff’s owned building, and the fire was completely destroyed at around 02:23 on the following day. However, the instant second fire, the Plaintiff’s building was completely set up due to the instant second fire, and multiple of household appliances, such as TV, cooling, laundry, laundry, and ladul, etc. owned by the Plaintiff.

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor was an insurer who had concluded the Plaintiff’s building and its household effects insurance with respect to the Plaintiff’s household effects, etc., and the Plaintiff’s household effects on the Plaintiff’s household effects after the occurrence of the instant 1 and 2 fire.

arrow