1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this case is insufficient to admit the Plaintiff’s assertion that there is a defect in the installation and preservation of the Defendant’s building on the part of the court of first instance, and the reasoning for the judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following, No. 4, No. 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Additional parts referred to in Article 758(1) of the Civil Act refers to a structure itself in a state where it does not have safety ordinarily in accordance with its purpose of use. The burden of proving the existence of the defect lies on the victim. Thus, in order to recognize the defendant's liability for damages, the fact that the defendant's building was in a state where it was not equipped with safety ordinarily required for the building to be equipped should be proved first, and the burden of proving the defect lies on the victim, who is the victim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 82Meu348, Aug. 24, 1982; 2014Da205591, Oct. 30, 2014).

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims should be dismissed as all of the grounds for appeal. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is justified, all of the appeals of the plaintiffs are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.