1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is subject to Paragraph (1).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a deposit contract with the purport that the Plaintiff shall keep the goods, such as the raw goods owned by the Plaintiff, and pay the storage fees to the Defendant in the freezing warehouse owned by the Defendant in Gangwon-gun (hereinafter “instant freezing warehouse”).

B. On March 23, 2016, a fire (hereinafter “the instant fire”) occurred in the freezing warehouse of the instant case, and pursuant to the instant deposit contract, 50 boxes out of the total of 358 No. 358 boxes, such as No. 40 and 152 boxes owned by the Plaintiff, which were kept in the freezing warehouse of the instant case (hereinafter “No. 308 boxes”), were destroyed, and the remainder of 308 boxes suffered damage due to drinking.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's statements or images of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (Evidence with a Serial Number) and appraiser D's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the appraiser D's appraisal, the remaining part of the old Ri of this case among the old Ri of this case is recognized as having lost the product value by smelling and changing the smell. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the old house of this case was entirely damaged by the fire of this case.

Therefore, the Defendant is liable to the Plaintiff for damages due to nonperformance of the duty to return the old-age interest in this case under the instant deposit contract.

B. 1) The scope of liability for damages incurred by the bailor due to the loss of the deposited object is an amount equivalent to the market price at the time of the loss, barring special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Da26892, 26908, Sept. 28, 1993).