beta
Text
1. As regards Defendant D’s KRW 34,197,200 and KRW 17,426,50, among the Plaintiff, Defendant D’s KRW 16,70 from August 18, 2016 and KRW 16,70 from among them.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an insurance contract with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E Co., Ltd.”) with options printing machines (F; hereinafter referred to as “one printing machine”) with the insurance coverage period from March 14, 2016 to March 14, 2017, with the insurance coverage amounting to 355,703,671 won, and with options printing machines (G; hereinafter referred to as “2 printing machines”) with the insurance coverage period from April 15, 2016 to April 15, 2017, with the insurance coverage amounting to 393,027,220 won (hereinafter referred to as “each insurance contract of this case”).
With respect to the printing machine 1, the non-party company entered into a lease agreement with the defendant C, who operates the J, with respect to the printing machine 2, and 1 printing machine 1 printing machine and 2 printing machine was used by the defendant C.
B. The “K” operated by Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) and the JJ operated by Defendant C used the 1st floor M units of the building in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu as the workplace and office, and H used the same floor N units as the workplace and office.
C. The defendant company and the defendant C shared with a half of the fee to use a warehouse with a size of about 50 square meters in size adjacent to the office towards the parking lot (which consists of a sandd position panel roof, and which is divided into the place of printing, printing, cooling, cooling, and outdoor equipment storage; hereinafter referred to as "the annexed warehouse of this case"). The defendant D provided a contract with the defendant for the construction of installing rainwater in the annexed warehouse of this case (hereinafter referred to as "the annexed warehouse of this case") with a price of KRW 1.5 million (including material cost), and as the defendant D needed work with a view to being employed through the human resources market, the construction of this case was conducted by employing a O with a personal career experience via the human resources market.
Defendant D around 08:00 on May 2, 2016.