logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.12 2015가단5088383
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) entered into a sales contract with the Defendant for the production and sales facilities of the E Team around August 17, 2009, with a company engaging in steam and hot water supply business, to supply a ice team within the Gyeonggi-do Dri Unit E (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). Among them, the instant construction contract for the construction project (hereinafter “instant retirement contract”) was included.

After the Defendant started construction on May 10, 201 due to the instant incineration, around August 201, the Defendant transferred the instant incineration to C and started a trial operation, and completed construction around November 22, 2011.

B. On December 22, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a comprehensive property insurance contract with C (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) as follows.

Insurance types: Securities number of comprehensive asset insurance : F policyholders/insured: G insurance period in Gyeonggi-gun Group: December 16, 201 to December 16, 201: General risk of property (building, structure, machinery, apparatus), machinery risk, business suspension risk.

C. On August 2012, around the end of the instant incineration, according to the fact that the internal cargo was released due to the instant incineration, and that the internal cargo was abandoned around the air supply pipe (hereinafter “instant accident”), C had suspended the operation of the instant incineration around August 28, 2012, and received the insurance accident from the Plaintiff.

On December 13, 2012, the Plaintiff paid C the total of KRW 170,242,620 with insurance money for the machinery and apparatus, and KRW 29,109,360 with insurance money for the suspension of business.

【Reason for Recognition】 Each entry of Evidence Nos. 1 through 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of the parties concerned is that the instant accident was delivered to C after the Defendant’s removal of internal cargo by the incineration of the instant case, or that the internal damage of internal cargo was facilitated due to the destruction and leakage of re-treatment rods, and that the Defendant’s execution.

arrow