beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an owner or possessor of Busan Shipping Daegu C Apartment 102 Dong-dong 801 (hereinafter “801”) and the Defendant is an owner or possessor of the above apartment No. 102 Dong-dong 901 (hereinafter “901”).
B. On April 23, 2014, when the Defendant and his/her family members left the fire, the fire occurred in around 17:43, and around 901 (hereinafter “instant fire”). In the process of extinguishing the instant fire, the fire-fighting water flows into 801, and the furniture, household appliances, sales boards, and remote areas were flooded.
C. On July 28, 2014, the Plaintiff received insurance proceeds of KRW 7,494,437 from the Eastern Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. with respect to the instant fire.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-2, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1-2 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The party's assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant fire occurred due to the inundation of fire (hereinafter “the first inundation”) and the inundation of KRW 801, which occurred by rainwater that came through the shouldered-ra window on May 12, 2014 (hereinafter “the second inundation”). The instant fire occurred due to the negligence that the Defendant went out without turning on the electric set, and due to the defect in the installation and preservation of 901, which is a structure, caused the first inundation and the second inundation. As such, the Defendant, as an owner and possessor of 901, the Plaintiff, pursuant to Articles 750 and 758 of the Civil Act, is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages incurred by the Plaintiff from the first inundation and the second inundation, 7,622,6222, the insurance proceeds received by the Plaintiff after deducting KRW 7,494,437,128,1285, Jan. 5, 2015.
B. (1) Determination 1) The Plaintiff’s primary inundation (1) general tort liability (Article 750 of the Civil Act) was committed by the Defendant, while going out, did not turn all of the electrical sets. Accordingly, the fire in this case.