beta
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. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government CB02 (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff CBD”) and is residing in the Plaintiff CBD, and the Defendant is the owner of the same CBD 102 (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant CB”) and is residing in the Defendant CBD.
B. Around August 2014, the toilet water leakage of Defendant Loan led to the Plaintiff’s toilet site and ice ice built at the Plaintiff’s toilet site. On November 28, 2014, following the occurrence of water leakage due to the aging of the drainage pipe of Defendant Loan Loans, the occurrence of damage, such as the occurrence of the Plaintiff’s fungco in a remote area where water was stored on the ceiling, floor floor of the original neck, etc. of the Plaintiff Loan Loans, and the damage was caused to the Plaintiff’s fungco in a remote area, or the change of water on the floor by drinking water.
(hereinafter referred to as “the water leakage of this case”). 【The grounds for recognition 】 Each entry of Gap’s 1 through 6 and the purport of the entire pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is the possessor of a structure, etc. under Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, and is obligated to compensate all damages incurred by the plaintiff due to leakage of the case.
In addition, according to the evidence Nos. 8 and 9 as to the scope of damages, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1,166,00 won for the above expenses and for delay damages calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from Nov. 28, 2014, which is the date when the first instance judgment is rendered to the defendant for the existence and scope of the obligation, and 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment.
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition and the remaining claims are justified.