1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. Quotation of the first instance judgment

A. The evidence submitted by the first instance court and the trial court and the plaintiff's grounds for appeal are examined, and the findings of fact and judgment by the first instance court are recognized as legitimate.

B. Therefore, the reasons for the entry in this case are as follows, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the assertion that the plaintiff added at the trial of the court of first instance, and therefore, it is identical to the entry in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. As such, it is cited in accordance with

2. Additional determination

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that Defendant B and C did not exercise their duty of care to maintain and manage the instant warehouse in an appropriate manner to prevent danger of fire, and they did not install facilities to prevent the spread of fire, such as illegally expanding the instant warehouse and storing combustible materials in large quantity in the instant warehouse; and thus, Defendant B and C did not perform their duty of care to maintain and manage the instant warehouse in an appropriate manner to prevent danger of fire; and as a result, damage was accumulated as a result of the spread of the instant fire, the defect in the installation or preservation of the instant warehouse and the instant warehouse should be deemed one of the joint causes of the Plaintiff’s damage. Accordingly, Defendant B and C are liable for damages as an occupant of a structure under Article 758(1) of the Civil Act and Article 750(1) of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the above defendants and the defendant D and E, who are their insurers, are jointly liable for the damages incurred by the plaintiff due to the fire of this case.

B. 1) According to the statements in Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1, and Eul evidence 1, the warehouse of this case is a wooden slate building, the use of which was approved on June 1, 1971, which was worn out. At the time of the fire of this case, the warehouse of this case was kept with a large quantity of combustible materials, such as PVC pipe, plastic heading, plastic heading, plastic heading, board, tent, etc., and the warehouse of this case is one floor structure in the general building ledger (BB).