1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to that part is dismissed.

2...

1. The Plaintiff asserted around 18:00 on June 11, 201, when the Plaintiff was faced with the Plaintiff’s head and shoulder while getting off the parking lot blocking at the new hotel parking lot located in Jung-gu, Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, and suffered injury.

(hereinafter referred to as "the instant accident". Since the instant accident occurred due to defects in the installation and preservation of the parking lot breaker, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for damages totaling KRW 16,477,940 (the treatment cost of KRW 5,477,940, the lost income of KRW 6,000,000, the consolation money of KRW 5,000,000) and damages for delay.

2. “Defects in the installation and preservation of a structure as prescribed by Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, which determine the cause of a claim, refer to the state in which a structure fails to have safety ordinarily required according to its use. In determining whether such safety is met, the standard should be determined whether the installer and custodian of the structure fulfilled his/her duty to take protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the risk of the structure. As such, even if an accident occurred in a structure, barring special circumstances, if such an accident occurred as a result of an exceptional behavior not in compliance with the ordinary usage of the structure, the installer and custodian of the structure is not obliged to take protective measures against such accident.

(1) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the following circumstances are comprehensively taken into account: (a) the process of the instant accident alleged by the Plaintiff; (b) the details and images of the instant accident; and (c) the testimony and pleadings of the witness B of the first instance trial; and (d) the testimony and the testimony of the witness C of the first instance trial, solely based on the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff and the testimony of the witness C of the first instance trial, to conclude that there was a defect in the construction and management of a mother-and-child system, which would have to be ordinarily installed during the parking lot blocking period.