1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On June 9, 2015, around 18:50, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she taken a bath at the private bath run by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant bath”). On the floor of the public bath entrance, the Plaintiff suffered injury equivalent to 10 weeks of the completeer value by extinguishing the water source remaining on the floor of the public bath entrance.

(hereinafter “instant accident.” The instant accident occurred due to the Defendant’s neglect of management, and the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 43,806,480 (the amount of KRW 1,836,880 for future treatment expenses, KRW 5,860 for future treatment expenses, KRW 16,00 for future treatment expenses, KRW 16,089,60 for KRW 20,000 for KRW 20,000 for damages and delay damages.

2. The Plaintiff is deemed to have claimed liability for nonperformance due to breach of the duty of safety consideration as incidental duty under the instant contract for the use of the bath of this case against the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff is examined as to this.

The duty of safety consideration falls under the duty to take necessary measures to ensure the safety of the life, body, health, etc. of the creditor in a certain type of contract. Since the bath of this case is under the exclusive control of the defendant, the defendant bears the duty to protect the safety of the customer by providing the customer with safe and comfortable facilities without danger.

This obligation is an incidental obligation recognized under the good faith principle, taking into account the special nature of the bathing service contract, and where the Defendant, in violation of the principle of trust and good faith, causes damage to the customer’s life or body, he/she shall be liable

In such cases, the existence of specific duty to protect victims and their violation.