logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.15 2015나14401
구상금
Text

1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From about 20 years to around 20 years, the Defendant leased to D the C Inn (hereinafter the instant building) located in Dobong-gu Seoul, Seoul (hereinafter the “instant building”), which is its owner, to D, for about about 10 years.

B. On March 14, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a fire insurance contract with D, with respect to the entirety of the instant inn and facilities, and the aggregate of the aggregate of the insurance coverage period from March 15, 2013 to March 15, 2016; and KRW 20 million in total of the total of KRW 50 million buildings, facilities, and the aggregate of the insurance coverage amount; and KRW 20 million in total of the total of the household fixtures ( KRW 2,733,494 in the facilities, KRW 17,26,506 in the household fixtures of KRW 2,73,494).

C. On August 29, 2014, around 9:55, a fire occurred in the instant building, and a part of the building, facilities, and fixtures were destroyed by fire.

(hereinafter referred to as the “fire of this case”).

The instant fire caused the total amount of KRW 24,681,541 (the total amount of KRW 26,316,856, and the total amount of KRW 24,681,541 (the total amount of KRW 21,883,815) of the instant building, and KRW 26,797,726, and KRW 21,883,815). The Plaintiff paid insurance money to D with the total amount of net damages (the total amount of KRW 26,316,856) for the damage of the instant building caused by the instant fire on November 14, 2014, and for the facility and the collection expenses (the total amount of KRW 20 million) for the facility and the collection expenses.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1 to 3, 8, Eul 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

가. 손해배상책임 관할 소방서는 화재원인에 대하여, 화염에 의한 소실이 심하여 전기적 요인인 1차 단락과 화염에 의한 2차 단락을 구분할 수 없어 미상으로 판단하고 있기는 하나, 앞서 든 증거와 갑 4, 5호증의 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하여 인정되는 다음의 사정 즉, ① 발화지점은 이 사건 건물 복도 천장부분으로 추정되고, 천장내부에 목재틀, 떡솜, 비닐장판, 먼지 등이 다량으로 덮여 있어 빠르게 연소가 진행되었던 것으로 보이는 점, ② 이 사건 건물이 노후화되어 있어 화재발생시 급격히 연소가 확대된 것으로 보이는 점,...

arrow