beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 86,259,308 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual 5% from September 18, 2015 to June 17, 2016, and the following.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person who, from the Defendant, operates a mutual clothes shop with approximately 170 square meters on board a part of the attached Table 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 of the building floor plan among the buildings of 284.55 square meters in the 1st, 2, 3, 4, and 1 in the order of priority among the buildings located in the 1st, 3, and 170 square meters in a building located in
B. On March 28, 2015, a fire occurred around the instant building (hereinafter “instant fire”) and resulting in the fire of clothing stores operated by the Plaintiff.
【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, and 6 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Summary of the parties' arguments;
A. The fire of this case occurred in a warehouse directly connected to the building of this case (a), (b), (c), (d), and (a) in succession to the building of this case; hereinafter “the warehouse of this case”). This is due to the defect in the installation and preservation of the Defendant, the possessor, and even if not, the Defendant is the owner of the above warehouse, and thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff damages incurred to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 758 of the Civil Act and damages for delay thereof.
B. As the accurate cause of the Defendant’s fire was not revealed, the Defendant is not liable for the Plaintiff, and even if not, the amount of damages claimed by the Plaintiff is excessive.
3. Determination
A. The defect in the establishment and preservation of a structure as referred to in Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, in which the defendant's liability for damages arises, means that a structure is in a state of failing to meet safety ordinarily required according to its use. In determining whether such safety has been met, it shall be determined on the basis of whether the installer and manager of the structure in question has fulfilled the duty to take protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the danger of the structure, and shall also be the defect in