logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2017.07.14 2016가단205662
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 9,355,58 for the Plaintiff and its related KRW 5% per annum from July 31, 2014 to July 14, 2017.

Reasons

Basic Facts

- The defendant is operating a restaurant with the trade name "D" (hereinafter referred to as "the restaurant in this case") in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si.

- At the immediately front of the entrance stairs of the restaurant of this case, there was a 10cm depth of 10cm. The defendant covered the iron plates above, and covered them with green plates.

- At around 19:00 on July 31, 2014, the Plaintiff completed meals in the instant restaurant and knew of whether there was any old stuff, and the Plaintiff passed over the green board without knowing whether there was any old ice, and there was an accident (hereinafter “instant accident”).

- The Defendant did not cover the pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use of the pre-use or pre-use

- In the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered bodily injury, such as cutting the peltos in the middle or lower part of the right lavers, cutting the lavers in the upper right lavers, cutting the lavers in the upper right lavers.

[Based on the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 7 (including the number of pages; hereinafter the same shall apply), each statement and image of Gap evidence, and each physical appraisal commission for the E Hospital funeral and F Hospital funeral of this Court, based on the overall purport of the argument, the defendant was aware that there was a risk of breaking the old celebling out of the old celebs in front of the entrance of the restaurant of this case due to the occurrence of the whole purpose of the argument. Thus, the defendant, who is the business owner of the restaurant of this case, of this case, is fixed so that they do not open even if they are covered by the old celebling or iron plates, etc.

arrow