beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. The court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on November 20, 2012 after serving a copy of the complaint against the Defendant and the notice of the date of pleading on the date of pleading on each service by public notice. On November 22, 2012, the original copy of the judgment also served on the Defendant by public notice, and the Defendant was unaware of the fact that the judgment of first instance was rendered at the latest, and the fact that the Defendant filed an subsequent appeal on September 6, 2013 was clearly recorded or was recognized in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings. Accordingly, the Defendant’s failure to observe the peremptory period of appeal on September 6, 2013 is due to any cause not attributable to the Defendant, and thus, the appeal in this case subsequently filed by the Defendant within two weeks from the time the judgment of first instance became final and conclusive is lawful.
2. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. (1) Around August 8, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a fire insurance contract with B with the following content.
① Insurance period: (2) From August 8, 2008 to August 8, 2013, the insured: (3) the second floor building in E (hereinafter “instant building”) and the aggregate fixtures (4): The amount of insurance coverage: KRW 300 million of the instant building and KRW 7 million of the aggregate fixtures (2) the Defendant leased the first floor of the instant building from B from May 25, 201 to operated the restaurant in the name of “C” (hereinafter “the leased part”), and the Defendant set up a water pipe outside the front floor of the leased part of the instant building (hereinafter “the instant water tank”) and kept active in the water tank.
(3) On February 16, 2012, a fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) occurred on or around 03:20, and the interior of the leased part of the instant building and the outer wall of the instant building were partially destroyed and the household fixtures, such as computers, on the second floor of the instant building were destroyed.
(4) The fire fighting commander who investigated the fire site of this case.