logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.04.26 2015가단5292939
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded a fire insurance contract, F, and insurance period from January 14, 2014 to January 15, 2015, with respect to the Eelel building located in Gu and Si/Gun/Gu (hereinafter “instant building”) and the facilities and equipment expenses/air equipment/Gus with respect to the construction of a fire insurance contract, F, and the insurance period from January 14, 2014 to January 14, 2019, respectively.

B. On February 4, 2015, around 13:46, a fire (hereinafter “the fire of this case”) occurred in the camping site located in the Gu, Si, Si, si, and Gu (hereinafter “Gu,”) and the guest rooms, etc. of the building No. 2 of this case were destroyed by fire, and the windows, etc. of the building No. 1 of this case were damaged by heat.

C. The investigation and scientific investigation team of the Gyeongbuk Provincial Police Agency, upon receipt of a request for identification at the fire site of this case, sent a reply to the following: “The specific cause of combustion is presumed to have been burned and spread around the first fire source, and there is no electric power plant that could function as a source of combustion around the materials storage site, and the fact that waste and cigarette butts are discovered in the state of dumping around the materials storage site, and thus, it cannot be ruled out that the possibility that non-fire-fighting species, such as cigarette butts, were burned into combustible materials, such as garbage that have been abandoned in the surrounding area, and that the possibility of combustion caused by human factors is not excluded.”

On April 10, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 830,430 to C, and KRW 20 million to F on April 16, 2015, and KRW 248,459,493 on May 28, 2015, respectively.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 13, the purport of whole pleading

2. The Defendants asserted by the Plaintiff are those who jointly occupy and use the materials, warehouses and open storages where the instant fire occurred, and are placed in the open storages and fire extinguishers.

arrow