1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence 1, 4, and Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply):

The Plaintiff purchased air conditioners produced by the Defendant Company (hereinafter “instant air conditioners”) and installed and used them on the side of a simplified warehouse after gathering the Plaintiff’s house located in Jung-Eup Si.

B. On January 20, 2009, around 23:50, fire occurred in the above simplified warehouse, and the Plaintiff’s house was relocated.

(hereinafter “instant fire”). 2. Ground of claim and determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the fire of this case occurred due to lack of stability of the air conditioners of this case, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount equivalent to that stated in the claim as compensation for damages.

B. The records of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 alone are insufficient to deem that the fire of this case was caused by the lack of stability of the air conditioners of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Rather, each of the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, which is recognized as being comprehensively taken into account the purport of the entire pleadings, the following circumstances, namely, the results of the appraisal by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation of the Fire of this case by the Korea Research and Investigation Agency did not distinguish the unique features, such as the air conditioning code and the air conditioning room, and the special features, such as the heat heat and the sprinking trace, were not identified. On the other hand, the electric wires discovered electric melting in the fire site are found, the fire of this case appears to have been caused by the electric joint lines from the above simple storage unit connected to the above simple storage unit, and it is not related to the air conditioning of this case.

(3) The claim of this case is dismissed on the ground that there is no reason to believe that the investigation of the Si/Eup/Myeon Police Station on the fire of this case was completed on the ground as above.