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

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff concluded three fire insurance contracts (hereinafter “each of the fire insurance contracts of this case”) with C and the insured as shown in the attached Form D with respect to each store of Ildong-gu B building (the 5th floor above the ground and the 1st floor below the ground) in Gyeyang-si, Busan-si.

B. Defendant A operated a general restaurant in the name of “E” in the above B building Nos. 205 and 305, but concluded a fire insurance contract by setting the amount of KRW 250 million with Defendant interesting State Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., and the insurance amount of KRW 250,000,000, and the insurance period from June 2014 to June 2016.

C. (1) On December 13, 2014, at around 22:30, the instant fire occurred in a place used as a 2nd floor (hereinafter “instant fire”) and as a material storage of the 2nd floor E in building, and the said fire was burned, causing damage to KRW 30,015,378,00 in total, including KRW 15,162,846, and KRW 12,749,382 in each of the instant fire insurance contracts, as to the subject matter of each of the instant fire insurance contracts, the amount of the facility damage was destroyed, and KRW 12,749,382 in each of the instant fire insurance contracts (such as air conditioners, meals, and kitchen supplies), KRW 292,320,320 in each of the remaining objects of the said fire, such as c,395,470 in total as c,39,470.

(2) On April 14, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 30,015,378, in total, KRW 16,734,194, KRW 1,611,830, KRW 11,69, and KRW 30,015,354 under each of the instant fire insurance contracts.

[Ground of Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 and 2 evidence, each of Gap 1 and 3, Gap 3 through 6, Eul 1, and the purport of whole pleadings]

2. Issues;

A. Whether Defendant A is liable for tort liability under Article 750 of the Civil Act against the instant fire (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion occurred due to negligence that caused the management of the electric facilities of the E-Sa warehouse, which is the area controlled by Defendant A, and thus, Defendant A is liable for damages caused by the instant fire pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act.

(2) There is no evidence to prove that Defendant A neglected the management of electric facilities at E points, and rather, entry Nos. 1 and 2 is written.