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

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

1. Basic facts

A. (1) The Plaintiff is an insurer that entered into a general fire insurance contract with A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) by setting the insurance period from December 31, 2013 to December 31, 2014.

(2) Defendant Dae Feng Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ssung Feng”) is a company that sells the protruding machine to A, and Defendant K non-life insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K non-life insurance”) is an insurer that entered into a product liability insurance contract with Defendant Dae Feng Feng and entered into a product liability insurance contract.

B. On November 3, 2014, around 11:06, when a fire occurred, fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) occurred in a kitchen located in the convenience store C located in the Yacheon-si (hereinafter “protruding-si”), and thus, the interior interior of the facility, such as interior interior tegra, electric installations, office fixtures, inventory assets, etc. were destroyed.

C. As a result of a fire cause investigation, the National Institute of Scientific Investigation has a view that the temperature control function of the temperature control device attached to the sponsing machine of this case is likely to be spread due to over-frying, etc. as it does not normally operate. D.

On September 1, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 25,709,131 insurance money to A as compensation for the damage caused by the instant fire.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the importer and installer of the instant sprinking machine, which was imported, sold, and installed a defective sprinking machine, and caused the instant fire. As such, the Plaintiff is liable for damages arising from the sales and installation of the instant sprinking machine due to the nonperformance of obligations or tort under the installation contract, or the manufacture defect of the instant sprinking machine, which is the product.

Furthermore, the defendant's non-life liability insurance is an insurer who has entered into a contract for product liability insurance with defendant M&P.