[손해배상(기)][하집1989(2),50]
The legal relations between the user of the Seoul Park Parking Lot and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the management agency.
Any person who intends to park in a parking lot installed outside the Seoul Metropolitan Park may enter the parking lot into the parking lot by inserting two 500 cubic centimeterss at the outside of the parking lot at the entrance of the Seoul Metropolitan Park. If the employee of the parking lot management office only entrusts the parking lot users with a change of the street or maintenance of the order in the parking lot, and if the parking lot operator is allowed the user to keep the vehicle in his/her own custody, the relation of the use of the above parking lot between the user and the Seoul Metropolitan Government, which is the management agency, is under the jurisdiction of collecting the user fee from the user instead of providing a temporary parking lot to the person who intends to use the above parking lot, who is a public use of the parking lot, instead of providing a temporary parking lot facility, it cannot be deemed that the use of the above parking lot is transferred to the Seoul Metropolitan Government or the possession of the parked motor vehicle is transferred to the Seoul Metropolitan Government or there is a duty to keep the vehicle in his/her possession.
Article 693 of the Civil Act, Articles 1 and 14 of the Urban Park Act
Plaintiff
Seoul Metropolitan Government
Suwon District Court of the first instance (88 Gohap4228)
1. The appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of 8,683,688 won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from June 1, 1987 to the delivery date of the complaint of this case, and the amount equivalent to 25% per annum from the next day to the full payment date, and the amount equivalent to 1,624,00 won per annum from July 1, 1987 to the full payment date of the above amount.
The costs of lawsuit shall be assessed against the defendant and a declaration of provisional execution.
Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the plaintiff ordering payment shall be revoked.
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of 8,628,688 won and the amount of 5% per annum from June 1, 1987 to the delivery date of the complaint of this case, and 25% per annum from the next day to the full payment date.
The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant in both the first and second trials and the judgment of enforcement.
around 10:00 on May 31, 198, Nonparty 1, the driver of the Plaintiff employment, paid KRW 1,000 for parking fees at the parking lot in the Seoul Special Park Park-si located in the city of Yacheon-gu, the Defendant managed and operated, and parked one truck with KRW 7:7944 tons of 2.5 tons, the Plaintiff owned, but the fact that the instant truck was stolen during the period from around that time to 15:50 on the same day is no dispute between the parties.
As the cause of the instant claim, the Defendant, who received parking fees by installing and operating the parking lot in Seoul Metropolitan Park, was negligent in performing his duty of due care as a good manager in order to prevent the theft of the stored vehicle, and the said theft accident occurred due to the lack of minimum theft prevention facilities to be basically equipped with the parking lot on the above parking lot. Thus, the Defendant asserts that, as a person who failed to perform his/her contractual obligation under the above truck, or as a managing authority of the above parking lot, which was defective in the installation and management of the above truck, the Defendant sought compensation for the damage of property amounting to KRW 7,059,688 and the cost of leasing other truck from June 1, 1987 to the 30th of the same month, as the Plaintiff suffered due to the theft of the above truck.
Therefore, according to the above testimony of Non-Party 2, the above-mentioned 1, 2, each of which is recognized as the entrance and exit of the Seoul Large Park, and the testimony of Non-Party 3, the defendant as the management office of Seoul Large Park, which is an urban park located in Jungcheon-si, prepared parking lot facilities for the use of the same park to temporarily park in the outside of the above park, and the users of the above parking lot who want to park are not obliged to use the above 500 won street to automatically open the parking lot, and the above 1, 4,000 parking lot which is located in the above 1,000 parking lot or the above 1,000 entrance of the Seoul Large Park and the above 4,000 parking lot which is located in the above 1,000 parking lot, and the above 5,000 parking lot which is located in the parking lot to prevent the use of the above 5,000 parking lot which is located in the parking lot. However, the above 5,000 parking lot is located in the parking lot.
Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case, which is premised on the defendant's non-performance liability or tort liability related to the theft of the above truck, shall be dismissed as it was returned to the court of first instance without any reason to determine the remainder, and it shall be dismissed as it is reasonable to conclude this conclusion. Thus, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without reason, and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Articles 95 and 89 of the Civil Procedure Act to the burden of litigation costs.
Judges Mung-hun (Presiding Judge) Kim Young-hun's profit winning