1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

Claim:

The reasoning of this court's judgment shall be the same as that of the judgment of the first instance concerning the defendant.

(The main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act). However, any addition, addition or addition shall be made as follows:

1. The phrase “be indicted” in the fourth and second sentence of the first instance court shall be read as “be prosecuted.”

2.The following shall be added to the fourth 12th sentence of the first instance court:

On August 28, 2014, the Supreme Court did not have any direct evidence to determine the cause or specific process of the fire in this case.

Even if we were to say that the fire in this case was in violation of B’s duty of care on the non-management of food oil and gas burners, since the gas burner’s flame was stuck in the oil and the fire was also under the control of B, it was determined that the fire in this case was in violation of B’s duty of care on the non-management of food oil and gas burner.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment below and remanded to the Seoul Central District Court.

(Supreme Court Decision 2014Do321). On January 22, 2015, the Court rendered a sentence of imprisonment without prison labor for eight months and two years of suspended execution, recognizing that B was guilty of occupational negligence.

(Seoul Central District Court 2014No3305). B re-appealed, however, on April 9, 2015, the appeal was dismissed.

(Supreme Court Decision 2015Do1764). 3. From the sixth eightth sentence of the first instance court to the Eleventh sentence are as follows:

In light of the structure of the instant restaurant and the fire site, the management status of food oil, fire and exhaust duct, etc. in the restaurant, the details of the business affairs of B, and the circumstances that are the person in charge of the direct handling of fire as a kitchen, etc., it is reasonable to deem that the instant fire was caused by occupational negligence, i.e., a breach of the duty of care in performing the business affairs of “management of the fire of food and gas burner.”

Therefore, the defendant, who is the employer B, is the main sentence of Article 756 (1) of the Civil Act.