Cases of erroneous recognition of the scope of the lessor's repair obligation

Even if there is a gap in the way in which the kitchen is combined with the kitchen, and there is a serious crack in the floor of the kitchen, it can not be said that the lessor has the obligation to repair.

Article 623 of the Civil Act

Defendant

Busan District Court Decision 77No1291 delivered on September 30, 1977

We reverse the original judgment. The case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

Judgment on the Defendant’s ground of appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment, the court below concluded a obligatory lease contract with the non-indicted 1,60,00 won for the lease of 1,00 won to the non-indicted 2, including the kitchen room in which the accident of this case occurred, from among the 1strings of Musan City and the 2nd floor of the house of 1975, which belongs to the defendant, on the basis of evidence, that the above double water has moved into this building with his family on the day of the lease contract with the non-indicted 1,60,000, since the defendant was unable to open the 1strings of the house of 1975 and the 1strings of the house of 1975, and there is a concern that the 1strings of the above 7th floor of the house of 1975 and the 1strings of the house of 2ndrings of the house of 197, and there is a concern that the above 1strings of the house of this case may not be repaired at the time of this case.

However, thorough examination of the evidence adopted by the court below is difficult to find out the fact that, regardless of the fact that there were 5 months old gas, it was hard to find out that there were only a large-scale method such as the removal of a kitchen room prior to the pre-contract, and the selection of a kitchen has to be made by newly stringing the door trusses, and that there was no difference in the number of the existing kitchens at the time of the accident, but there was no difference in the number of the kitchens at the time of the accident, and there was no difference in the number of the kitchens at the time of the accident, and there was no difference in the number of the kitchens at the time of the accident, and there was no difference in the number of the kitchens at the time of the accident, and there was no difference in the number of the kitchens at the time of the accident, and there was no difference in the number of the kitchens at the time of the occupancy of the kitchens at the time of the above building, but there was no difference in the number of the kitchens at the time of the accident.

Therefore, the original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Ahn Byung-soo (Presiding Justice) (Presiding Justice)