beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Intervenor C are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne respectively by each party.
Reasons
1. As to this part of the facts admitted, the corresponding part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to the judgment on the claim for the refund of the lease deposit by the plaintiff and the intervenor (the intervenor C shall be
3. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim for damages
A. According to the Plaintiff’s claim for damages under a lease agreement, Article 623 of the Civil Act, the lessor is obligated to maintain the leased object in a state necessary for its use and profit-making. Accordingly, even though the lessor has a duty of care to prevent damage caused by a fire, the Defendant did not install fire-fighting equipment for the instant building, such as sprinklerr, and did not take measures to prevent the burning of the vulnerable parts of the fire, and is liable for the occurrence or expansion of a fire due to an illegal extension. Therefore, the lessee shall be held liable for damages due to breach of the lease agreement. The amount of damages is KRW 131,687,010, which is calculated through depreciation, etc. for the verified goods, other than the equipment destroyed by the instant fire. 2) The lessee bears the duty of due care of a good manager regarding the preservation of the leased building. In order to compensate for damages due to the lessee’s nonperformance of duty to return the leased object, the lessee is not liable for the cause attributable to the lessee.
However, even if it is found that there is a cause for the lessee's breach of the duty to preserve the leased object in a state necessary for the lessee to use and benefit from it, it is not possible to exempt the lessee from the liability even if the lessee proves that he/she has fulfilled the duty to preserve the object separately.
Therefore, housing and other buildings or parts thereof.