[손해배상][공1979.2.15.(602),11554]
The case holding that the establishment of a high-tension line has an ordinary safety;
In the installation of high voltage lines, there were no special circumstances, the installation and preservation of structures must be safe enough to cause harm to others in light of the laws and regulations or objective situations.
Article 758 of the Civil Act
Plaintiff 1 and two others, Attorneys Yang-hee et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant and one other
Korea Electric Power Co., Ltd. and one other, Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellee and one other
Seoul High Court Decision 77Na2007 delivered on July 6, 1978
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
We examine the grounds of appeal No. 1 by Plaintiffs’ attorneys.
The theory of the lawsuit does not seem to have been shown to the purport that the judgment of the court below was criticized by citing evidence preparation and fact-finding which belong to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court below. According to the original adjudication, it cannot be deemed that the court below erred by misunderstanding the contents of the lawsuit in its judgment based on the premise of the argument of the lawsuit, and even after examining the records, there is no evidence to find that there was an error of law in violation of the rules of evidence such as the theory of the lawsuit, and there is no evidence to prove that there was an error of law in the process of documentary evidence verification, such as the theory of the lawsuit, and it cannot be said that
This issue is groundless.
We examine the second ground for appeal.
In addition to the performance necessary to achieve the proper purpose, damages due to defects in the installation and preservation of a structure mean that the structure lacks ordinary safety that may cause harm to others in light of the objective situation, such as changes in natural or artificial environments, and thus, if the structure causes damages to others, the possessor or the owner of the structure shall be responsible for the damages. Thus, even if damages were caused by the structure, it shall not be held liable to the possessor or owner on the ground that it is occupied or owned even though it was owned by the snow company. According to the facts duly established by the court below, the installation of a special high-tension processing line at issue in this case maintained 8.07 meters above the statutory distance from the surface of the wall, and the installation of a special high-tension processing line and the installation of a special high-tension processing line at issue cannot be viewed as being 3.6 meters above the statutory distance from the roof, and there was no special circumstance that there was no other danger or harm to others. Thus, the defendants cannot be viewed as having been held liable for the safety of the electric wires at issue.
Therefore, this appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)