1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claim extended in the trial is dismissed.

3. Costs of appeal and appeal.

1. On May 31, 2012, the Defendant, who served as an appraiser at C of the National Institute of Science and Investigative (hereinafter “the instant apartment”) conducted appraisal of the cause of the outbreak of the fire incident (hereinafter “the instant fire”) around 11:00 on April 24, 2012 and prepared an appraisal report thereon on May 31, 201, in Vietnam, owned D’s 50-dong 50-dong 101 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) and owned by D, and prepared an appraisal report on the cause of the outbreak. In fact, despite the occurrence of a fire inside the instant apartment washing machine installed in D of the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant washing machine”), the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages on account of the following: (a) the Plaintiff, who caused property damage; and (b) the Plaintiff, who is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a compensation for damages.

2. Determination

A. The following facts are recognized in full view of each of the statements in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments, which are significant in this Court:

(1) D, the owner of the instant apartment, claimed that the instant fire occurred due to the defect in the instant washing machine, and filed a claim for damages against Samsung Electronic Co., Ltd., the manufacturer of the instant washing machine.

(B) On September 11, 2015, the first point of the fire of this case is presumed to be the part of the Contac and all of the washing machines, and the first point of the fire of this case is presumed to have been burned on the washing machine, it is presumed that the upper part of the washing machine was destroyed by fire, and that the upper part of the washing machine was destroyed by fire inside the washing machine, and that the fire occurred from the washing machine to the outside.