beta
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2015.11.11 2013가단110115

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Facts of recognition

On August 15, 201, the Defendant leased Nos. 3 and 201 (hereinafter “instant housing”) to D and E by setting the deposit amount of KRW 5,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 280,000, and the lease period of KRW 20,000, August 20, 2013.

On May 14, 2013, the Plaintiff suffered 3 degrees of images from a fire that occurred in the entire part of the wall installed on the wall of the entrance (hereinafter “instant fire”) among the lockeded in the instant house on May 14, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] A. 1 through 3 (including a land number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the entire pleading as to the purport of the pleading, the Plaintiff sought damages against the Defendant, who is the owner of the structure, for damages incurred by the defect in the installation and preservation of the subdivision, on the premise that the Plaintiff himself/herself was in the same position as the direct occupant of the instant house.

Judgment

If any damage is inflicted on another person due to a defect in the installation or preservation of a structure, the possessor of the structure shall be liable for the damages first, and the owner of the structure shall be liable for the second damages only if he/she fails to exercise due care necessary for the prevention of damage. However, if the possessor, who is the lessee of the structure, or a person deemed to be in the same position, suffers from the damage due to a defect in the installation or preservation of the structure, the owner shall be liable for the damages.

(2) Article 758(1) of the Civil Act provides that “the possessor of a structure under Article 758(1) of the Civil Act shall be a person who has the authority and responsibility to repair and manage the structure in order to prevent various accidents that may arise from defects in the installation or preservation of the structure, while de facto controlling the structure.”

(Supreme Court Decision 200Da386 Decided April 21, 2000). Accordingly, the Plaintiff is the direct occupant, who is the lessee of the instant house.