1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 3-1, 2, and Eul evidence 1:

The plaintiff is the tenant of Nam-gu apartment unit B (hereinafter referred to as "the apartment of this case") 503, and the defendant is the tenant of the apartment of this case 603.

B. On November 201, 2013, there was a ice in a remote and remote area where water leakage occurred in the Plaintiff’s apartment inside the inside of the apartment site.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

D) After having been contacted by the head of the apartment site in this case to prevent the superior officer, D separated pipes from the pipes of the Plaintiff’s household (503) and the Defendant’s household (603), confirmed that the inside part of the pipe’s upper part of the pipe of the Plaintiff’s household (503), the inside of the pipe of the Plaintiff’s household (503) was obstructed by foreign substances, and confirmed that the inside part of the pipe of the upper part of the pipe of the Plaintiff’s household (503) was obstructed by foreign substances and excavated by removing and blocking them.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a matter that can be confirmed only by the Defendant as to whether the superior officer in the part of the Defendant’s household was prevented or not, and thus, if the superior officer did not play a proper role, the Plaintiff neglected to take appropriate measures and thereby caused the instant accident even though it was obligated to prevent the occurrence of damage, and thus, the Plaintiff is liable to compensate for the Plaintiff’s property and mental damage.

B. According to the above facts, the accident of this case is determined as an accident where large amounts of rainwater, which did not flow out in the situation where the excellent part of this case was obstructed by foreign substances, is determined as an accident where a large quantity of rainwater flow out on the part of the Plaintiff’s household (No. 503), and as a result, it is examined below as to whether the Defendant is liable for the occurrence of the accident of this case.

First of all, the defendant's prohibition of this case's superior officer.