1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an integrated insurance contract with Nonparty B and B with respect to non-party B’s products and fixtures at the store to compensate for the damage upon the occurrence of a fire.

B. On December 16, 2011, around 16:00 on September 28, 201, a fire occurred in the vicinity of the second floor of the Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, D’s wooden fixtures, and roof buildings owned by the Defendant, and the product, collection fixtures, etc. inside the stores of B adjacent to the said building were damaged by flames and fire fighting waterways.

(hereinafter “the instant fire accident”). C.

The Plaintiff assessed the amount of damages sustained by B due to the instant fire at KRW 61,165,029, and paid the above insurance money to B.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the cause of the instant fire occurred is presumed to be the electrical factors of the second floor E among the buildings owned by the Defendant.

The building owned by the Defendant is a stringer building with 60 years elapsed, and the 6th floor of the store was operated in accordance with the lease agreement with the Defendant respectively. Electrical facilities, etc. at the 2nd floor of the store “E” located in the area controlled and managed by the lessor because the 2nd floor of the 2nd floor of the store, which is the first fireproof point of this case, constituted part of the building structure. The Defendant neglected to take protective measures, such as checking dangerous substances in the occurrence of ordinary fire, and failing to actively take measures to prevent fire, and thus, the fire accident occurred. Accordingly, the Defendant shall be liable for damages caused by the defect in the installation and preservation of the structure.

B. The Defendant’s assertion was not revealed that the cause of the instant fire occurred, and the Defendant was subject to regular safety inspection from the Korea War.