1. The part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following amount among the judgment of the first instance, shall be revoked:

1. Grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this part of the facts recognized

1. The fact of recognition;

In addition to the fact that the part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as "the damage equivalent to KRW 120,432,244, which is the total amount of KRW 117,037,788, the damage of the facilities and fixtures caused by the fire of this case, and the total amount of KRW 3,394,456, the damage of the movable property shall be the damage equivalent to the total amount of KRW 117,037,788," it is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the

2. Obligation to pay indemnity money:

A. The defect in the installation and preservation of a structure as referred to in Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, which is the cause of liability for damages, refers to a state in which a structure does not have safety ordinarily according to its intended purpose, and in determining whether such safety has been met, the determination shall be based on whether the installer of the structure has taken protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the danger of the structure.

In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement Nos. 1 through 14 of this case, it is reasonable to deem that the time when oil was put inside the tent and exhaust pipe inside the instant restaurant, and that there was a state in which the safety was not secured due to the failure to clean up at the time, and that there was a state in which the gar and exhaust pipe did not have been ordinarily equipped. As such, the Defendant is liable to compensate for the damage of E caused by the fire of this case pursuant to Article 758(1) of the Civil Act.

B. As seen earlier, the scope of liability for damages is recognized that E suffered damages equivalent to KRW 120,432,244 due to the instant fire.

However, in full view of all the circumstances revealed in the arguments of this case, such as the cause and scale of the fire of this case, the degree of negligence of the defendant, the target and degree of damage, the cause of combustion and the expansion of damage, and the economic condition of the defendant.