The defendant's KRW 16,178,656 to the plaintiff and its related KRW 5% per annum from February 23, 2018 to March 4, 2021.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is the owner of a living facility and an office near the fourth floor of the 4th floor of the steel-based concrete sleep roof in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”). On August 2017, the Plaintiff leased part of the first floor of the instant building from the Defendant (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s lessee”) around August 2017, and sold cosmetic products, etc. while operating a marina shop at the same time.

B. In such a case, water leakage has occurred on the floor and outer wall of the building of this case due to the dynamic wave, water pipe wave, etc., and the equipment and office fixtures on three occasions in total, including February 23, 2018, April 5, 2018, and June 15, 2018, were flooded (hereinafter “the entire flood accident of this case” collectively referred to as “the total flood accident of this case”; when specifying it on the flood date, “the instant 0th flood accident” in the order of time”). [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, images, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the defendant neglected his duty of care in the process of maintaining and managing the building of this case, resulting in water leakage on the floor and outer wall of the building, resulting in the flood accident of this case where the facilities and household fixtures of the leased part of the building of this case are flooded. Thus, the defendant is the owner and lessor of the building of this case, and is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the flood accident of this case.

B. 1) The Plaintiff suffered a loss equivalent to KRW 155,472,00,00 in total, including expenses for restoration works on its original condition, due to the damage caused by the inundation of this case, as shown in the attached Table of Damage Details (i.e., the construction expenses incurred by the primary flood of this case) due to the damage equivalent to KRW 58,650,00, such as the construction expenses incurred by the second flood of this case (i.e., the construction expenses incurred by the second flood of this case).

The argument is asserted.

B) The plaintiff's evidence Nos. 2 through 5 seems to correspond to the above facts of the plaintiff's assertion.