beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 12,601,519 with respect to the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from October 31, 2013 to May 1, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Defendant A leased the first floor store of the building located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from C and operated a restaurant.
However, around June 29, 2013, around 21:15, D, employed by Defendant A, laid tins above the knife in order to remove the food wastes remaining in the knife in the knife in the above restaurant, and was loaded with the food wastes on the knife, the fire that had taken out in the gas siff in the gas sife was stuck onto the knife (hereinafter “instant fire”).
As a result, the interior facilities and Korean uniforms operated by E on the second floor of the above building were destroyed by fire.
B. From June 28, 2013 to June 28, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a fire insurance contract with E with regard to movable property within the entire building and the single house with a subscription amounting to KRW 50 million, and with regard to the damage for the suspension of business of a store, with a subscription amount to KRW 10 million.
Defendant Han Lan Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Han Lan Insurance Co., Ltd.”) concluded a facility owner liability insurance with Defendant A, setting the insurance period from June 29, 201 to June 29, 2016, with the maximum amount of compensation as KRW 1 billion per accident, with respect to the said restaurant.
C. On August 23, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) paid KRW 50,00,000,000 of the insurance coverage amount of KRW 254,297,420 of the damages of movable property in the above house; and (b) paid KRW 3,66,716 of the store shutdown damages on September 3, 2013; and (c) paid KRW 14,335,454 of the amount of damages of the second floor of the building in question under the overlapping insurance ratio of KRW 24,137,166 of the said amount of damages to the building owner on October 30, 2013.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including the serial number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant A is responsible for the employer under Article 756 of the Civil Code against D with respect to the fire of this case, or to install and preserve the above restaurant.