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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff is the insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles owned by C (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the company that carries out the maintenance and management of the mechanical parking machine installed in the Etel 2 building in Namyang-si (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On May 1, 2017, C entered the Plaintiff’s vehicle into the instant mechanical parking machine on May 1, 2017, and around 12:40 on May 2, 2017, C operated the said parking machine to drive the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and there was an accident that causes damage to the between the between the between the parts and the between the parts and the rear glass of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On May 30, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,578,000 at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in accordance with the instant accident to the repair site of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s accident of this case is merely 1,600 meters lower than 2,270 meters as specified in the design drawings, considering that the design defect or defect of the mechanical parking machine of this case (the height of the vehicle parking section is 2,270 meters; the height of the Plaintiff’s vehicle is 1,430 meters; the height of the vehicle parking section of the instant mechanical parking machine of this case is 1,600 meters lower than that of the 2,270 meters specified in the design drawings; the height of the vehicle parking section of the Plaintiff’s vehicle of this case at the time of opening the string line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle of this case is 1,700 meters higher, the instant mechanical parking machine of this case is designed to ensure that if the string line of the vehicle inside the parking machine is opened,

In addition, the defect occurred due to management defects, and the defendant should pre-examine the mechanical parking machine of this case and manage it to prevent the occurrence of the accident, but he neglected this and provided the cause of the occurrence of the accident. Thus, as the installer and manager of the mechanical parking machine of this case, Articles 758 and 750 of the Civil Act or the Product Liability Act are applicable.