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

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 20, 2013, around 05:37, a fire occurred in the building listed in the separate sheet owned by the Defendant C (hereinafter “instant warehouse”) on the attached list owned by the Defendant C (hereinafter “instant warehouse”), and there was an accident that the instant warehouse was relocated to the front place of the instant warehouse, and that the Plaintiff was residing in the vicinity of the instant vessel (hereinafter “the instant house”) was transferred to 3 debt buildings other than the instant house, and to 4 cars parked in the nearby area.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant fire accident”). B.

Due to the instant fire accident, all of the Plaintiff’s household tools located in the instant housing were destroyed by a fire accident.

C. Meanwhile, the results of the review on the fire causes revealed by the fire department chief of Gangnam District Fire Station which investigated the instant fire accidents are as follows. The final conclusion theory is as follows: “The fire fighting source, the fire fighting factors, the first cargo, the fire fighting-related equipment, the products and power source are both US and US, and the expansion of the burning object is as the styp and the grounds for expanding the burning object are as follows.”

방화 가능성 : 화재발생 장소 내부에서 외부인 사망자 아래 강릉경찰서장의 내사결과에 따르면 이는 피고 C의 고등학교 동창인 E이다. 가 발생한 것으로 보아 외부인 출입에 의한 방화 가능성 배제할 수 없으나, 창고 전체의 완전 소실로 방화 관련 물증 확인이 지난함 전기적 요인 : 창고 내부에 형광등, 스팟조명 등 전기설비가 있어 전기적 요인 배제할 수 없으나, 창고 전체에 걸쳐 완전 소실되어 전기적 요인 물증 확인이 지난함 기계적 요인 : 발화창고 내부에는 나무난로 전시를 위하여 연통은 설치되지 않은 채 난로 몸체가 있던 상황이었으며 쪽문 방향에 있던 난로 안의 타다만 나무와 종이 흔적은 구매자가 수리를 위하여 가져온 제품으로 기계적 요인 배제함 가스 누출 : 폭발흔적을 찾을 수 없어 배제함 인적 부주의 : 가족에...