1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from September 1, 201 to April 23, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff operates an electrical construction company with the trade name of “C” at the office located in “C” at the Silti City, and at the time of Silti City, the Plaintiff has stored various electrical construction materials, such as copper cables, lamps, etc., in each warehouse with attached Form 1 1, 2, and 3 (hereinafter each of the above warehouses is specified as the number, and each of the above warehouses is combined with each of the above warehouses.

B. The Plaintiff leased No. 4 (hereinafter “No. 4 warehouse”) to E, and the Plaintiff, around February 2010, kept the machinery, such as machinery, and the machinery owned by F in the fourth warehouse.

C. Around March 2, 2011, F: (a) around March 2, 201, after destroying and damaging locks installed at the entrance of the 4th warehouse; and (b) removed F-owned machinery stored therein; (c) Plaintiff and E became aware of this around April 5, 201.

On June 1, 2011, the Plaintiff visited each of the instant warehouses with electrical construction materials, and then destroyed the locks of the 2 and 3 warehouses. The Plaintiff discovered that electrical construction materials stored in each of the instant warehouses were stolen (hereinafter “instant crime”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 9 (including each number, if any), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On June 1, 2011, the Plaintiff reported to the 1112 Reporting Center immediately upon finding the instant crime.

The police officers belonging to the Si Heung Police Station and the Si Heung Police Station sent to each warehouse of this case on the same day and confirmed the scene.

The instant crime was committed on June 3, 201, which was distributed to Hah on June 3, 201. On August 11, 2011, Hanman notified the Plaintiff of the investigation schedule for the detection of the false statement about F, which the Plaintiff designated as the suspect by telephone around August 12, 201, and around October 28, 201, Hanman notified the Plaintiff that F was judged to be guilty, and that F was determined to be guilty as a result of the investigation, each of the instant crimes, each of the instant cases, to listen to statements, on-site investigations, and to secure 18 CCTV images installed near the area.