A. The Defendants jointly share KRW 279,567,468 as well as the aforementioned from August 17, 2015 to September 28, 2017.

A. The attached building (hereinafter “instant building”) owns 1/2, 3/14, 3/14, D, and 2/14 shares of co-ownership. The Plaintiff leased the entire floor of the instant building from Defendant C around September 2006 and operated F at the place around that time.

B. From August 14, 2015 to August 17, 2015, the volume of tap water supplied as the instant building flows into the entire underground floor and the instant store was flooded.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to claims for damages against the Defendants

A. Article 758(1) of the Civil Act provides that “A person who causes damage to another person due to defects in the construction and preservation of a structure shall be liable for damages; however, if the possessor of the structure fails to exercise due care to prevent damages, the owner of the structure shall be liable for damages.” Here, the defect in the construction or preservation of the structure refers to the state in which the structure does not have ordinary safety according to its intended purpose. Determination of whether the installer or the custodian of the structure has fulfilled his/her duty to take protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the risk of the structure (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da101343, Apr. 29, 2010) shall be based on the following legal principles: (a) Nos. 4, 6, 9, evidence Nos. 3, 5 through 7 ( were included) of the Act; (b) evidence verification at the site; (c) evidence verification of the witness; and (d) testimony and testimony of the evidence at the court as a whole.

① The instant store is a toilet using water supply.