1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings on the entries or videos of Gap evidence 3 to 5 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul evidence 1 and 2:

On April 16, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement (hereinafter “instant credit transaction agreement”) with Defendant B, the head of the Defendant New Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant New Bank”), stating that “the Plaintiff is receiving a loan of KRW 490 million from Defendant New Bank” (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”) and received a loan of KRW 490 million on the same day.

B. On the same day, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table Nos. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) and the building listed in paragraph (2) of the same list owned by the Plaintiff as collateral for the above loan (hereinafter “instant building”) with regard to the building, the maximum debt amount of which is KRW 588 million, and the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant building”).

C. Since then, the instant building was destroyed by fire on December 29, 2013, and as of April 9, 2013, the appraised value of the instant building was KRW 155,91,000, and the appraised value of the instant land was KRW 528,960,00.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. At the time of the instant credit transaction agreement, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant B would obtain a secured loan from the Defendant B, and sought an explanation that the fire insurance on the instant building is essential, and requested the Defendant B to subscribe to the fire insurance on behalf of the Plaintiff, and the Defendant B also consented thereto.

However, Defendant B did not subscribe to the fire insurance as to the instant building. Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered damages not paid KRW 155,91,000, which is the appraised value of the instant building, which was destroyed by a fire, as insurance money, and the Plaintiff’s negligence seems to have been 30%.

Therefore, Defendant B suffered the Plaintiff from the tort as above by the Plaintiff.