채무부존재확인
1. On July 31, 2015, around 12:00, the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Superior exceeded the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) in front of the stairs of the first basement underground floor in Gangnam-gu.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person who manages a warehouse located on the same floor (hereinafter “the warehouse of this case”) in the name of “D” (hereinafter “Plaintiff restaurant”) while operating a general restaurant in the name of “D” (hereinafter “D”) among the neighborhood living facilities on the 1st underground floor as indicated in paragraph (1) of the Disposition.
B. On July 31, 2015, around 12:00, the Defendant suffered injury, such as the right pelle, etc., on the wind, which is likely to have a bad faith on foreign substances presumed to flow out from and flow out of the warehouse of this case among the Plaintiff restaurants after completing meals at the parking lot.
(hereinafter referred to as the "accident of this case"). . [Ground of recognition] 4 to 6 Eul, 8-1, 8-1, the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Determination of the cause of the claim and counterclaims shall be examined together. A.
Plaintiff’s assertion
Since the accident of this case solely occurred by the defendant's fatherism, there is no liability for damages to the plaintiff, but there is an intention to pay 1 million won as consolation money to settle the dispute smoothly among the parties, so it is sought to confirm that there is no liability for damages caused by the accident of this case in excess of the above money.
B. The Defendant’s assertion is liable for damages under Article 750 of the Civil Act with respect to the instant accident, and thus, the Plaintiff is liable for damages (i.e., KRW 31,791,941 (i.e., KRW 13,990,825) (i., KRW 1,261,261,935 daily lost income of KRW 6,539,181, KRW 10,000), and damages for delay.
C. (1) According to the above recognition of the liability for damages, such as the occurrence of liability for damages, the accident of this case is deemed to have occurred due to negligence caused by the Plaintiff’s failure, even though foreign substances were discharged or brought about a danger to walking in the warehouse of this case managed by the Plaintiff, so the Plaintiff is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the Defendant pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act.
(b).