In a case where passengers aboard an automatic guide installed in a slope in a park for play overlap in order with passengers getting out of the entrance, and the victim was injured, the case holding that it is sufficient to view that the operator of the play facility failed to fulfill his duty of care necessary to prevent safety accidents and protect users, such as restricting the boarding of excursion vehicles, etc., or not assigning safety personnel to help such passengers get out of the entrance, and there is sufficient reason to view that the operator of the play facility failed to fulfill his/her duty of care to prevent accidents and protect users.

Article 750 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and three others

Samsung Antland Co., Ltd. (Attorney Park Jong-nam, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Busan District Court Decision 2009Na3637 Decided August 26, 2009

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the plaintiffs' claim for damages arising from the accident of this case, on the ground that the defendant did not take sufficient measures to protect the users on board, merely because he did not assign safety personnel at the entrance of icewegs, considering the circumstances that there was a door to use icewegs, stating that he would board at a certain distance from the front, at the entrance of the automatic winding machine installed in the slope in the Bergland where the accident of this case occurred, and that there was a notice of cautions to users through broadcasting.

However, the following circumstances revealed by the reasoning of the judgment below and the records are as follows. ① The accident of this case is: (a) the passengers on board ice are unable to properly get out of the ice, and the passengers on board ice in order from the behind to the next order due to the progress of ice, and more passengers on board 40 in the following order; (b) the passengers on board the second grade of the middle school exceeded 1, and the passengers on board the front and the front grade of the second grade of the middle school suffered damages, such as slots, due to the use of the ice, etc.; (c) there is no choice but to place a certain height at the exit of ice; and (d) there is a high probability that the Defendant used the ice in such a way as to temporarily get out of the ice, including the removal of the ice, and (d) there is a high probability that the Defendant used the ice ice in order to ensure the safe passage of the above airport, and (d) there is a high probability that the above ice ice may not be used.

Nevertheless, the court below's decision that the defendant has no violation of any obligation is erroneous in the misunderstanding of the rules of evidence or misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the duty of care of the operator of play facilities.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Min Il-young (Presiding Justice)