beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with A on the B Ecoos car (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the company in charge of the operation and management of the mechanical parking system in the Siwon Building in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant parking system”).
B. At around 17:40 on May 16, 2013, A tried to send the Plaintiff’s vehicle normally stored in the instant parking zone. On the grounds of the failure in the parking zone, there was an accident that caused the damage to the string of the Plaintiff’s vehicle caused by the mechanical failure in the parking zone.
(hereinafter referred to as the "accident of this case")
On June 21, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,240,000 as insurance money for the repair cost of Plaintiff’s vehicle.
【Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy Facts, each entry or video of Gap evidence 1 through 6, and purport of whole pleadings】
2. The assertion and judgment
A. In light of the determination as to the cause of the claim, Article 17(3) of the Parking Lot Act that applies mutatis mutandis to the manager of an annexed parking lot pursuant to Article 19-3(2) of the Parking Lot Act provides, “The off-road parking lot manager shall not be exempt from liability for damages caused by the loss or damage of the vehicle except where he/she proves that he/she has not been negligent in performing his/her duty of care as a good manager with respect to the custody of the vehicle parked in the parking lot.” The following circumstances revealed in addition to the above-mentioned facts and the overall purport of the pleading, namely, the instant parking lot falls under an annexed parking lot under the parking lot under the Parking Lot Act, which is a mechanical parking lot installed in the Siwon Building, and the instant accident is a large-scale accident that occurred after A parks the Plaintiff vehicle normally at the parking site and the Defendant, the manager of the annexed parking lot, who is the manager of the attached parking lot