1. The plaintiff's claim that was changed in exchange in this court is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff’s total costs of litigation.

1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. Plaintiff 1) The instant fire was burned out of the Plaintiff’s factory building, which is an insurance purpose. (2) Even if not, it should be interpreted that the “fire occurred from the insurance purpose” of the instant special agreement includes the case where the fire that occurred from a building or object other than the insurance purpose is burned for the insurance purpose.

3) If the special terms and conditions of this case are interpreted only as “where a fire occurs for the purpose of insurance”, the Defendant did not explain the contents of the terms and conditions premised on the said interpretation to the Plaintiff at the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, and thus, it cannot be asserted as the content of the instant insurance contract (Article 3(4) and (3) of the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act). Even if the instant fire was not directly generated from the factory building, which is the insurance purpose, the defect in the construction or preservation of the factory building was the joint cause of the instant fire, and thus, the Plaintiff was liable to compensate for damages in accordance with the structure liability under Article 758(1) of the Civil Act.

5) Accordingly, according to the instant insurance contract, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant for payment of the insurance amount equivalent to KRW 109,000,000 borne by the Plaintiff against F Co., Ltd., the insurer of the non-party company.

B. The instant special terms and conditions stipulate that the Defendant shall compensate for damages suffered by another person due to a fire or explosion that occurred from the insurance purpose stated in the insurance policy. The instant fire was first launched within the “scarfs of a tent building” that does not fall under the insurance purpose, and thus, it does not constitute a fire that occurred from the insurance purpose. Therefore, the damages suffered by another person pursuant to the fire liability guarantee special agreement.