logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.05.19 2016나2051932
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the remaining plaintiffs and the defendant except the plaintiffs E are paid below.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the owner of the Jung-gu Seoul Central District Building (hereinafter “instant fire building”).

B. Plaintiff A is the lessee of the third floor of the Seoul Jung-gu M Ground Building located in the instant fire building and the neighboring area (hereinafter “the instant damaged building”). Plaintiff B is the husband of the said Plaintiff, and Plaintiff C and D are children of the said Plaintiff.

Plaintiff

G and I are tenants of each part of the fourth floor of the damaged building of this case.

Plaintiff

F and H are the children of Plaintiff G, and Plaintiff E is the mother of Plaintiff I.

C. around April 19, 2013, N was requested by the Defendant’s husbandO to reinforce the roof of the instant fire building, and the Defendant agreed to receive construction cost on a daily basis, instead of separately setting the construction period.

N from around that time, the three copies of the three which he started to work together with the roof reinforcement work was carried out.

(hereinafter “instant construction”) D.

On April 21, 2013, the fire occurred after the flames were melted on the roof of the fire building of this case.

(hereinafter “the instant fire”). The instant fire: (a) the outer wall of the instant damaged building was destroyed by the fire; (b) the smoke occurred from the fire inside the instant damaged building; and (c) the fire fighter destroyed part of the glass windows of the instant damaged building or damaged the household gate during the process of extinguishing the instant fire.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 8, 16 evidence, Eul's 1 through 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)'s entries, images, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether liability for damages is established;

A. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion as to the establishment of employer liability is the employer who directed N to the construction of this case, and is liable to compensate the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the fire of this case.

Even if the defendant is a contractor, he shall take measures to prevent fire accidents against N.

arrow