1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to adding “2. Additional Determination” to the Plaintiff’s assertion, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

2. Additional determination

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion and the act of the Codefendant D of the first instance trial constituted the instant fire, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to compensate for the damages in cases where several persons inflict damages on another person by joint tort (liability of joint tortfeasor) under Article 760(2) and Article 760(1) of the Civil Act.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall also apply where it is impossible to find out which person's act among the joint acts has inflicted damage thereon.

according to the purport of the appeal, the Plaintiff shall be paid the amount stated in the appeal.

B. Article 760(2) of the Civil Act, even though there are several acts that can be seen as the cause of damage, there is no objective act relation between them, and thus, joint tort under Article 760(1) is not constituted due to the lack of objective act relation, while it is unclear as to which act is causing damage, the burden of proof of the victim as to causation is mitigated in order to protect the victim by reducing the burden of proof of the victim as to causation.

Therefore, in order to apply Article 760 (2) of the Civil Code, it should be premised on the existence of multiple third parties' actions that are likely to cause the damage suffered by the victim.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Da88108 Decided June 14, 2012). Therefore, in a case where it is difficult to recognize the existence of multiple persons, who are not the joint owners, per se, or where it is difficult to recognize intention, negligence, and illegality of an act, Article 760(2) of the Civil Act cannot be deemed as being applied. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone leads to a cable connected to the system by G, who installed electrical installation works upon the Defendant’s instruction.