beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer that entered into a business partnership comprehensive insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) with respect to the subject matter of insurance, with the entire insurance period from July 22, 2015 to July 22, 2016, with respect to the steel-frame structure factories and installed machinery located C, with the insurance period from July 22, 2015 to July 22, 2016, with the insurance amount of KRW 1,165,809,00, and the Defendant is the owner of the land located above D(S) and its ground-story factory and the office of single-story (hereinafter “instant land” or “instant factory”).
B. On November 17, 2015, around 21:07, a fire (hereinafter referred to as “instant fire”) occurred in the closed-off powder powder (hereinafter referred to as “closed-off powder”), which was set up on the instant land, and one set of the outer wall of a factory owned by the non-party company located in the vicinity, and one set of the washing tower out of the installed machinery.
C. Under the instant insurance contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 25,564,660 to the non-party company with the insurance proceeds on January 12, 2016.
In the investigation department of the Gyeongbuk Provincial Police Agency which conducted on-site inspection of the fire of this case, it is desirable to convert the processed process, such as freezing method, into small-scale or distributed-scaleized powder to prevent heat decomposition as a result of the outbreak of a smoke due to the increase of carbon and temperature. However, the place where the fire occurred can be presumed that the fire was caused by the heat decomposition occurred at the end of the crushed powder, but the accurate cause of the fire was considered to be 'non-explosion'.
[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap 1-6 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the fire of this case is a dangerous substance of the Defendant.