1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. 1) Defendant C is the owner of each building indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 and attached Table No. 2 on the ground thereof. 2) Defendant C leased, on March 13, 2012, the Plaintiff, among each buildings listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table No. 2, Gdong warehouse (hereinafter “Gdong warehouse”), and Defendant B leased each of the above buildings B-dong 198 square meters (hereinafter “Bdong warehouse”) from each of the above buildings around March 2012.

B. On March 4, 2014, at around 20:28:30, a fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) occurred in the Bdong warehouse, and the Bdong warehouse was removed, and the Gdong warehouse was moved to another warehouse around the fire.

C. The cause of the instant fire ① The instant fire was ignited inside the Dong warehouse, and it is presumed that there was no probability of fire prevention.

② Although it is likely that the flame has been rapidly reduced inside the same warehouse B, there is a possibility of combustion by electrical factors, the primary electric melting point, which is the direct cause of the electric fire, cannot be found, and the secondary electric melting point, which is the direct cause of the electric fire, is discovered, but is not a direct cause.

(3) It is difficult to find out the cause of damage to the point of combustion due to excavation work for fire extinguishment, because the extent of damage is serious.

④ In light of the fact that no one exists inside the B-dong warehouse, there is no probability of chemical emission due to mechanical factors, and there is no gas facility at the point of emission and no trace of gas use. Therefore, there is no possibility of gas generation due to gas leakage.

Fire has occurred rapidly, and it is presumed that the probability of fire due to human care, such as fire fighting and nuclear care, is small.

The fire officers D, E, and F, assigned to the fire officers assigned to the fire station, who investigated closed-circuit images installed near the fire site of this case and B warehouse, determined as follows.

[Reasons for Recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 12 and Gap evidence Nos. 14 through 17 are numbers.