1. The Defendant’s KRW 108,962,885 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from December 6, 2018 to July 10, 2020.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant, located in Pyeongtaek-si C, operated the wooden mentor and the second floor of the roof (hereinafter “Defendant’s side building”) with the trade name “D”.

B. On the ground of Pyeongtaek-si E, the land immediately adjacent to the Defendant’s building, three floors of reinforced concrete structure slive roof owned by F (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s side building”).

Plaintiff

On the first floor of the building, G operated the miscellaneous point with the trade name "H".

The Plaintiff concluded each fire insurance contract with I and G, the mother of F, and with the following contents:

The insurance contractor and the insured insured insured’s insurance period: (a) from March 5, 2015 to March 5, 2020 to February 15, 2022, from February 15, 2017 to February 2015, 202, the Plaintiff’s building on the part of the Plaintiff; and (b) the purchase price of the first floor of the building on the part of the Plaintiff’s building on the third floor; (c) KRW 200 million, KRW 360,000,000, KRW 100,000, KRW 20,000, KRW 10,000, KRW 30,000, won;

C. On January 29, 2018, around 06:07, a fire occurred in the part where a small compressionr of the first floor inside the Defendant’s side building is located, and the Defendant’s side building was relocated, and thereby, the Plaintiff’s building was damaged by burning.

(‘instant fire’). The Pyeongtaek Fire Station and the Pyeongtaek Police Station have failed to disclose the cause of the instant fire.

By December 5, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 105,468,768 to I (F) as fire insurance money, and KRW 112,456,003 to G, respectively.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions and images of Gap evidence 1-9, and the results of the inquiry and reply to the fact-finding police station of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The defect in the installation and preservation of a structure as referred to in Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, which is one of the causes of liability for damages, refers to a state in which a structure fails to have safety ordinarily required according to its intended purpose. In determining whether such safety has been met, the installer and custodian of the structure is generally required by social norms in proportion to the risk of the structure.