beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the additional selective claims filed by this court are all dismissed.
2. After an appeal is filed.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the addition of the following determination as to the Plaintiff’s new assertion, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's new assertion
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the security guard B of the Defendant’s factory was an employee of the Defendant, and was in charge of the Defendant’s factory security service. The CCTV was promptly informed of the fire in the event of the occurrence of the fire in the factory at any time while conducting security service, and neglected to do so even though he had an occupational duty to prevent the spread of the fire in the factory, which led to the occurrence of the fire in the guard room from 00:30 on the day of the occurrence of the fire in this case, and the fire in this case was locked at around 02:0 on the day of the occurrence of the fire in this case and at around 10:0 on the day of the occurrence of the fire in this case. The said negligence in the B caused or expanded the fire that
The defendant is the employer of B and is liable for the damages incurred by the plaintiff due to the fire of this case pursuant to Article 756 (1) of the Civil Act.
B. As seen earlier, the instant fire occurred around 01:50 on August 21, 2015, and comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as indicated in the evidence Nos. 12-1, No. 2, and No. 9, the Defendant’s security guard: (a) around August 20, 2015; (b) around 17:30 on the same day, the Defendant’s security guard installed the security facilities installed in the Defendant’s office Dong; and (c) around 22:00 on the same day, the Defendant’s employees retired from the office; (d) installed the security facilities installed at the entrance of the Defendant’s factory Dong after patroling the inside of the factory Dong; and (e) patroled the outside and the factory after the lapse of the storage room; and (b) around August 23:50 on August 20, 2015; and (e) around May 21, 2015, the security facilities installed.