1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. On April 12, 201, at around 21:20, a fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) occurred in the Jinando-gun, Jinandong-gun, Jinandong-gun, the Defendant owned at the Jinando-gun, Jinandong-gun, B (hereinafter “the instant water conference”), and the goods displayed inside the instant water conference 7.2 square meters and the goods, etc. displayed therein were transferred.

B. The fire in this case spreads to a neighboring store, and where approximately 35 square meters out of 105.6 square meters of the building of the D-ground E-Repair (hereinafter “instant repair center”) located adjacent to the instant water conference, there was a loss of which 10 square meters out of 211 square meters of the building adjacent to the instant repair center (hereinafter “instant post office”).

C. On January 20, 2012, the Plaintiff, as an insurer who concluded a general fire insurance contract on the instant post office building, assessed the amount of damage from the instant fire to G, the policyholder, as KRW 3,665,655, and paid the insurance proceeds.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 15-1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts, pursuant to Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant medical conference, is obligated to pay insurance money for the damage incurred to the instant post office buildings, etc., which were burned out due to the fire, and to pay the Plaintiff the amount calculated by the rate of 20% per annum from March 9, 2012 to the date of complete payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, to the day of complete payment.

B. As to this, the Defendant argued that the instant fire was started in the waste oil storage room located front of the right corner of the repair center of this case due to an unforeseen cause, and went into the water circuit of this case. However, in light of the contents of witness statements recognized in light of the aforementioned evidence, the fire station’s investigation results, and the investigation results of the police prosecutor’s office, etc., the instant fire is in question.