1. The Defendant’s KRW 31,449,200, and the annual rate of KRW 5% from September 3, 2017 to January 30, 2020, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates a bath with the trade name of “D” in the Gu and America City.

B. On June 29, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to manufacture a pressure-free hot water boiler (hereinafter “instant boiler”) and install it in the said bath operated by the Plaintiff, and to pay the Defendant a total of KRW 21,000,000 in the cost of production and installation thereof. The Defendant manufactured the boiler under the said contract and installed it in the said bath operated by the Plaintiff around August 30, 2016.

C. The boiler of this case is designed to prevent the excessive heat purchase due to the suspension of the operation of boiler when the temperature of the said heat purchase rise above a certain level, and there is an emission source to emit the steam in preparation for the cases where the heat purchase is overheated and the water steam is generated.

On September 3, 2017, while operating the boiler of the instant case, there was an accident in which the steel plates of a water room (in a space between the outer surface of the boiler and the outer steel plate, there was an accident in which the steel plates of the burner and the heat exchange machine were burnedd (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

E. At the time of the accident, there was no trace of fire at the time of the accident. The heat exchange engine and the burning room of the boiler of this case had no trace of transformation and damage, but there was no mix of alteration and damage, but a hydrogen iron plate, which was caused by heat purchase, was modified and destroyed.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the verification by this court, the result of the appraiser E’s appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred due to the manufacturing defect of the boiler, and the Defendant totaled 50,000 damages under the Product Liability Act to the Plaintiff.