1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff entered into a contract with H as to the owner E of the third floor D restaurant (hereinafter “victim store”) among the 4th floor buildings located in Young-si, Young-si, with the owner of the damaged store and its facilities, fixtures fixtures, and movable property, and with respect to the insured, the insurance period is from November 1, 2017 to November 1, 2022. The insurance amount is KRW 60 million in the building, KRW 10 million in the facility, KRW 5 million in the house, KRW 5 million in the movable property, and KRW 5 million in the movable property (hereinafter “instant accident insurance contract”). The Defendant entered into a fire liability insurance contract with H, the owner of the G building located in Young-si (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On August 30, 2018: (a) around 05:31, the occurrence of a fire in the first floor restaurant of the instant building (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) and the spread of the fire to the surrounding areas, resulting in damage, such as the interior studio of the damaged store and the loss of household fixtures.

C. On November 27, 2018, the Plaintiff paid insurance proceeds of KRW 11,709,300 to the insured E, based on the instant accident insurance contract.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion that the fire of this case occurred is a water tank used by the restaurant of this case (hereinafter “water tank of this case”). In light of the fact that the above water tank coolant, etc. was confirmed, it is reasonable to view that the fire of this case was caused by the owner and possessor of the restaurant of this case’s failure to perform his duty of care in the installation and management of electricity, electric cable, etc. of the water tank of this case. Thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate for damages caused by the fire of this case as an insurer of the fire liability insurance to which the above H joined, and the Plaintiff who paid the insurance money to the insured pursuant to the insurance contract of this case against the Defendant based on the insurer subrogation.