beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff, Defendant A, and Defendant B and C, jointly and severally with Defendant A, respectively, KRW 258,080,850 among the above amounts.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. D Co., Ltd. related to the parties (hereinafter “D”) is a company engaged in the manufacture and sale of glass products, and around September 2008, Defendant A served as the representative director of Defendant D, Defendant B as the director of the production management division of Defendant D, and Defendant C as the head of the production and manufacturing team.
B. D’s glass products were produced from March 2004 to March 2004 by using machinery and equipment in the factory, Jincheon-gun E (hereinafter “instant factory”). The aforementioned machinery and equipment consist of 1,2, and 3 blick-ro, blick-type, and blick-type, blick-type, and blick-type, blick-type, click-type, and blick-type, c
(2) The main process of manufacturing glass products is to melt the raw materials of glass into the sea of this case and to transfer them to each of the types of glass products of this case. The main process of manufacturing glass products is to melt them from the sea of this case and to transfer them to the sea of this case.
Since 20 tons of liquid glass of high temperature 24 hours are stored on the instant sea route, the walls of the current sea route, which are composed of internal cargo, are maintained at an adequate temperature so that air conditioners installed outdoorly so that they can withstanding at high temperature, are supplied to the wall surface of the melter, so that the wall of the current sea route is not overheated.
C. On July 7, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a fire insurance contract with D and the insured, and entered into a fire insurance contract with D with the subject matter of the instant machinery, insurance premium of KRW 738,300, insurance premium of KRW 1,605,160,000, insurance premium of KRW 1,600, and insurance period from July 7, 2008 to October 7, 2008 (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).
On September 11, 2008, Defendant B established a type of machinery of this case Nos. 2 and 3, and added glass to the machinery by making the machinery flown into the machinery, and Defendant B and Defendant C did not perform appropriate fire extinguishing by avoiding the jobs.