beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the damages amounting to KRW 2,620,000 following the termination of fire insurance is 1) The Defendant asserted that the Defendant would be the restaurant Nos. 203 and 204 (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) at around December 5, 2012, 203 and 204 (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).
(2) The Plaintiff’s business was taken over and succeeded to the fire insurance for the instant restaurant, which paid a total of 6,800,000 won from June 1, 2010 to December 1, 2012, as well as the fire insurance for the instant restaurant. However, the Defendant did not pay the above insurance money more than 600,000 won for three minutes, and the Plaintiff, who was contacted with the demand from the fire insurance company, has terminated the insurance without any choice, and was refunded KRW 4,179,015,00. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 4,179,015 (excluding KRW 60,000,000 from the insurance money paid to the Plaintiff) after deducting the remainder of the insurance money paid to the Plaintiff as KRW 6,80,00,000 (excluding KRW 60,000,000). The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff and the Defendant subscribed to the fire insurance cannot be accepted as the Plaintiff’s allegation.
B. The plaintiff's assertion 791,000 won 1) A passbook (Account Number: D; hereinafter "the account of this case") in the name of the plaintiff while the defendant takes over the restaurant of this case from the plaintiff.
A) The Plaintiff used the instant restaurant and deposited KRW 791,00,00, which was deposited on December 27, 2012, in the name of the window sold to the Changwon Waterworks employee on November 2012, the day before the Plaintiff transferred the instant restaurant. Therefore, the Defendant shall return the said money to the Plaintiff. (ii) According to the reasoning of the judgment fee book and the evidence No. 3-4, the fact that the instant account was deposited in the name of the Changwon waterworks in total KRW 791,00 on December 27, 2012.
However, the following circumstances such as Gap evidence No. 26 and the overall purport of the arguments are revealed, namely, the food cost of the staff of Changwon-si Waterworks.