1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiffs are the owners of Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) E (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s apartment”), and the Defendant is the owner of the instant apartment F (hereinafter “Defendant’s apartment”).

B. The pipes of the apartment of this case are pipes with a diameter of 100 meters, which are installed to ensure the excellent of the rooftop and the water supply of each household boiler. They are installed from the 28th floor to the bottom of the plaintiff's apartment building, and they are installed to be cut vertically to the second floor through a horizontal section of about 60 cm by plucking and plucking up to the second floor.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant did not reside on the Defendant’s apartment from November 2017.

From January 23, 2018 to January 30, 2018, Korea-China continued to run down to 11.4 to 17.8, and around January 30, 2018, there was an accident where the Defendant’s boiler pipes of the apartment of the apartment of the apartment of the apartment of the apartment of the instant case were cut off and supplied with a large quantity of boilers. As a result, the part of the apartment of the instant apartment of the apartment of the instant case with a 4th floor pipe (b) was cut down with a Han wave, the supply volume of the said large quantity of the apartment of the apartment was not drained under the lower volume, and the said accident was caused by the inundation of the living room, etc. of the Plaintiff’s apartment of the apartment of the instant apartment of the instant case (hereinafter “instant accident”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, 12 evidence, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul 1 to 3, 7 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the above facts, the Defendant had a duty of care to manage boiler pipes so that the boiler pipes do not break out by taking appropriate anti-frequency measures since the Defendant did not use the Defendant’s house for a long time from November 2017, 2017, winter, and thus, the Defendant supplied the pipe of the apartment on the part of the Plaintiff by neglecting such duty of care.