If the leased room is not suitable for the door, or there is a defect such as the collapsed floor, the person responsible for the repair and management thereof.

If the leased room does not fit the door properly, or there is a defect such as a gap in the degree of entry into one lot between the wall and the wall, it is a minor defect that the lessee is unable to use the room or can not be seen as a large-scale defect. Therefore, it is a lessee's obligation to repair and manage the room.

Article 623 of the Civil Act

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul District Court Southern Branch Court (83 High Court Decision 3018)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent.

The gist of the defendant's defense counsel's appeal is as follows: first, the victim non-indicted 1 and non-indicted 2's death in the governance of the house located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 4 Dong Dong-dong (Ban omitted) (hereinafter this case's room) which is the defendant, is not caused by the defect in itself, such as the gap in the floor and the wall of this case, or the gap between the kitchen and the window, but rather, the victim's "curg" of the gas discharge machine without properly closing the kitchen door, was caused by the plaintiff's losses; even if there was such defect in this case's room, the defendant was not a lessor, and it was so small that the defect was caused due to the lack of a request for repair from the whole tenant, and thus, the ordinary repair obligation for this defect was committed against the lessee, and therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles of this case's appeal or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the plaintiff's negligence, which affected the conclusion of the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, taking account of the following facts: (a) Nonindicted Party 1’s statement and the result of inspection of the party construction site conducted by Nonindicted Party 4 at the lower court regarding the first instance court’s reasoning of appeal; (b) Nonindicted Party 4 purchased the above house from Nonindicted Party 4 in the name of Nonindicted Party 5; and (c) Nonindicted Party 4 gave governance to Nonindicted Party 6 on April 30, 1984; (d) Nonindicted Party 4 and Nonindicted Party 3 did not know that there was a large-scale repair of the above house; (c) Nonindicted Party 4 and Nonindicted Party 3 did not have any other reason for the repair of the building; and (d) Nonindicted Party 4 and Nonindicted Party 3 did not have any other reason for the repair of the building; and (d) Nonindicted Party 4 and Nonindicted Party 3 did not have any other reason for the repair of the building at the end of the first night of the year; (d) Nonindicted Party 3’s disposal of the building at the end of the night; and (d) Nonindicted Party 4 and the following day of the kitchen.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the trial shall be decided as follows after pleading.

The summary of the facts charged of this case is that the defendant purchased a house located in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 4 Dong Dong-dong (Ban omitted) from Non-Indicted 4, and purchased a house from Non-Indicted 5, and had Non-Indicted 3 reside from May 9, 1980. The above abundance bank is only one door leading to the kitchen, and the door does not fit the house properly, and there is a danger that the door can come up with the window, so the defendant who was managing the above house at the time of this case, repairs the door, cut off the door so that he can not come up with the door, and caused the death of the above non-Indicted 3 in order to prevent the strings, and received a demand from Non-Indicted 5 several times from the above husband and wife, but the above house was not repaired by Non-Indicted 3, and it is not accepted by Non-Indicted 1, and it is not accepted by Non-Indicted 1, and it is not accepted by Non-Indicted 1, 1982.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Kim Jong-he (Presiding Judge)