logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.11.06 2014가단80726
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 4,500,00 for Plaintiff A; (b) KRW 5,177,600 for Plaintiff B; and (c) for each of them, from December 30, 2013 to November 2015.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) The occurrence of the instant accident C (hereinafter “the deceased”).

(2) On December 30, 2013, 200, 1003 lines of local highway 1003 lines in the vicinity of the above residential area were located in Hadong-gun D (hereinafter referred to as “instant drainage route”) and the irrigation channel installed on the street around which they walk (hereinafter referred to as “instant drainage route”).

The accident of this case (hereinafter referred to as "the accident of this case") which fell and died with low temperature.

(2) The length between the drainage and the road of this case is around 2.8 meters. On the side of the drainage of this case, there are access roads leading to the deceased’s residence on the road.

The side of the drainage road of this case is about 1.5 meters in depth with a concrete wall, and the side of the opposite part deceased's residence is about 2.5 meters in depth in the shape of a knbmer spack, and about 2.1m in depth with access road.

The width of the drainage channel is about 2.1m in terms of entry, about 1.5m in the part, and there was no facility for preventing the fall, such as a cover or fence.

After the accident of this case, a protection fence was installed between the road and the drainage.

3) From September 14, 2012 to December 12, 2012, the Defendant, as the party, has installed and manages the drainage of this case, such as the establishment of a U-type measuring tool to the drainage of this case, while conducting the “E District Maintenance Work” as the “E District Improvement Work”, and the Plaintiffs are the offspring of the Deceased. [Grounds for Recognition] There is no dispute, and each entry (including the serial number, and the result of the on-site inspection by the court of this case) in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5.

B. According to the above facts, the drainage of this case is connected to the entrance road leading to the deceased's residence on the road, and there were other houses in the vicinity, and there was a risk of falling the sideway or the person walking along the above entrance is likely to fall, and there was no facility to prevent the fall, and the accident of this case occurred due to the defect in the construction and management of such public structure.

Therefore, the defendant is against the plaintiffs of this case.

arrow