1. The Plaintiff’s portion of the claim for property damage in the judgment of the court of first instance, which ordered the payment below.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged based on Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, Gap evidence Nos. 1-5, Gap evidence Nos. 5, Eul evidence Nos. 6-1, and Eul evidence Nos. 6-1, and the result of the physical examination commissioned to the Katol University Daejeon Hospital in the first instance court, the result of the on-site inspection conducted by the first instance court, and the whole purport of arguments.

The defendant shall operate a sales and repair shop in the name of "G" from Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter referred to as the "instant store").

B. On September 27, 2012, at around 14:30, Plaintiff A visited the instant store in order to exchange Oral wave. On the same day, around 14:39 of the same day, Plaintiff A was injured by an accident falling down under the stairs connected to the underground floor located on the right side of the entrance, which was entered into the office of the instant store (hereinafter “instant stairs”) (hereinafter “instant accident”), and suffered from an injury to fluorial bladial transfusion.

C. Plaintiff B is the husband of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff D and C are their children.

Plaintiff

A is a state in which it is difficult to operate himself/herself with the gymnasium at present and there is a speech disorder.

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

(a) The possessor of a structure shall be liable to compensate for the damages if he causes damages to others due to a defect in the installation or preservation of the structure; and

(Article 758(1) of the Civil Act. The term "defect in the installation and preservation of a structure" refers to a state in which a structure fails to meet the normal safety requirements according to its use.

Whether such safety has been met must be determined on the basis of whether the installer or the keeper of the relevant structure has fulfilled his/her duty to take protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the risk of the structure.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da61615, Feb. 11, 2010). Moreover, an accident resulting from a defect in the installation or preservation of a structure causes only the defect in the installation or preservation of a structure.