logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.08 2018나29718
구상금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to C vehicles owned by B (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant is the owner of the five-story building located in Young-gu, Suwon-si (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On August 6, 2017, the Plaintiff’s driver: (a) around 17:44, the Plaintiff’s vehicle parked the Plaintiff’s vehicle on the instant parking lot; (b) the Plaintiff’s driver left back the top lid which was installed on the parking lot floor while parking the Plaintiff’s vehicle; and (c) the Plaintiff’s lower part and front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle were destroyed (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. On August 22, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 559,000,000, excluding its own charges, at the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The defect in the installation or preservation of a structure as referred to in Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, which is liable for damages, refers to a state in which a structure fails to meet normal safety requirements according to its use. In determining whether such safety is satisfied, the determination shall be based on whether the installer or keeper of the structure has fulfilled the 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 2009Da101343, Apr. 29, 2010). According to the foregoing facts, the instant accident occurred as follows: (a) the instant building parking lot floor owned by the Defendant was covered by the last lid without properly fixing it; and (b) safety signs, etc. requiring attention was not installed in the above condition; (c) while the Plaintiff’s parking vehicle parked, the instant accident occurred as the last lids from the last lids that run down.

arrow