1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the costs of supplementary participation.

1. The facts under the basis of facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be found either as evidence A, as evidence Nos. 1 to 7, 22, 23, 26, and 27 (including the number; hereinafter the same shall apply), as evidence Nos. 2, or as a whole, with the overall purport of the pleadings. A.

On September 1, 2015, the Defendant, around September 1, 2015, took over the business of D and 1st underground floor E (hereinafter “instant bath”) from the Intervenor joining the Defendant and currently operates it.

B. On October 27, 2014, the Plaintiff used the hot bath of the instant bath to leave the entrance to the entrance, and was injured by the dives of the first unit, which was installed in front of the entrance, where the entrance was laid down in the front of the entrance door door door door door, and was damaged by the dives of the dives of the dives of the dives and the upper left-hand side.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The Plaintiff was 61 years of age at the time of the instant accident.

C. The entrance of the bath in this case is in the structure to be cut up, and the entrance was installed with the first studs in front of the entrance, and the studs of the carpet material were attached on the floor below the studs.

2. Assertion and determination

가. 원고의 주장 이 사건 목욕탕에는, ① 목욕탕 내 출입문 앞에 설치된 돌계단의 폭이 출입문의 폭보다 좁고 바닥에는 비눗물이 흐르고 있었음에도 미끄럼을 막을 수 있는 아무런 장치가 없었고 나아가 미끄러질 수 있다는 위험을 경고하는 문구나 안내도 없었으며, ② 이 사건 목욕탕 내부에서 보아 돌계단의 우측에는 샤워기가 설치되어 있어 샤워기와 돌계단 사이에 물이 튀는 것을 막아줄 시설도 없었고, ③ 돌계단 우측 상부에는 목욕탕을 이용하고 나가는 사람들이 사용한 비누, 치약, 수건 등을 넣어두는 바구니가 있었으며, ④ 돌계단과 이 사건 목욕탕 바닥의 높이는 110mm 정도 차이가 나는바 돌계단에서 발이 미끄러지는 경우 중심을 잃고...