beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 130,500,000 as well as 5% per annum from February 17, 2013 to August 25, 2016 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, according to the judgment on the cause of the claim, the defendant, on February 17, 2013, was found to have destroyed the fire by fire of the defendant's total sum of KRW 130,500,000,00,00 for the warehouse C and the cargo of the D-wing and C, which were residing with the plaintiff on February 17, 2013. The defendant destroyed the fire of the above building and the cargo of the warehouse owned by the plaintiff, all of the collection equipment, such as household appliances stored inside the warehouse, and the cargo of the above warehouse.
According to the above facts, pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for property damage equivalent to KRW 130,500,000 that occurred to the plaintiff due to the above fire-prevention act.
Furthermore, although the plaintiff sought compensation for consolation money of KRW 30 million, in case where a property right is infringed by other person's illegal act, mental suffering is also deemed to have been recovered by compensating for such property damage, and the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone caused irrecoverable mental damage to the plaintiff as compensation for property damage.
It is insufficient to recognize that the perpetrator knew or could have known such special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Da25628, Dec. 10, 1991); and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the same.
Therefore, the above part of the plaintiff's assertion is rejected.
If so, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 130 million won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from February 17, 2013, which is the date of this decision, to August 25, 2016, which is the date of this decision, and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment.
2. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit.