손해배상(기)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff equivalent to the amount ordered to be additionally paid shall be revoked.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Carryover (hereinafter “E”) (the aggregate building of the first and second floor, consisting of three divided buildings each floor) and the first floor (hereinafter “D”), and the Defendant is the owner of CBD 2 (hereinafter “E”).
B. Around January 2, 2017, water leakage occurred in the ceiling on the Dog-ho-ho, Dag-ho, and thereafter, the kitchen and the small room began to move toward the kitchen and the small room.
(hereinafter “instant water accident”). As a result, there was a damage in a remote area where water was reduced in the area D, and a remote area was damaged.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 14, 18, 20, 35, 36, 37, Eul evidence No. 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to liability for damages
A. In full view of the records and images of evidence Nos. 5, 12, 13, 15, 16, 23, 29, 33, 34, 41, and 42 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the first instance appraisal commission, the water leakage accident in this case seems to have occurred due to defects in the heating pipes of the floor No. 12, 13, 15, 16, 23, 29, 33, 34, 41, and 42, due to
Note B, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10 (including paper numbers) and images shall not interfere with such fact-finding.
Therefore, the Defendant, the owner of E, is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for all damages incurred by the water leakage accident in this case.
B. In full view of the evidence evidence Nos. 6 through 10 of the scope of damages and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff can be acknowledged as having paid the following expenses due to the water leakage accident in this case.
In light of the statements and images of Gap evidence Nos. 5, 26, 27, 31, 46, 51, and 53, this is for the detection and removal of a water source, the prevention and repair of damage under subparagraph 4 damaged by water leakage, and all of them are deemed to have proximate causal relation with the water leakage accident of this case, and thus, it is included in the scope of the amount of damage to be compensated by the defendant.
1) The water leakage diagnosis cost of KRW 500,000.