logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.09.08 2014가합72329
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Defendant B Co., Ltd. shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 72,692,052 as well as its annual interest from December 9, 2014 to September 8, 2016.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff leased 495 square meters of the instant building from Defendant C’s Sung-si D’s land (hereinafter “instant building”) and manufactures printing machines using the name “E” from this place.

B. Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) stated the records of this case of the panel established within the building of this case as “ the board”, but the records of this case were stated as “the panel” in accordance with the desirable loan marking method.

At the boundary of the walls, the freezing valves are manufactured in the part adjacent to the plaintiff's workplace, and the defendant C is the representative of the defendant company as the inside director of the defendant company.

C. On March 21, 2014, around 08:20, at around 08:20, a fire occurred in the instant building while the employee FF of the Defendant Company engaged in melting operations at the instant building (hereinafter “instant fire”). A part of the printing machinery and parts, etc. located within the Plaintiff’s workplace due to the instant fire were sleeped on the paths, and the fire brigade dispatched was flooded on a sleeped fire water.

Although it is necessary to install partitions, etc. so that the cause of the fire of this case can not be scattered, it is presumed that the fire of this case, while being engaged in melting work without taking such measures, fire fighting sprinking the combustible materials such as dust around the wall sand position panel of the building of this case, and that the fire fighting spice, which is the inside the sandd location panel, was burned out from the sand pump.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3-1 through 4, and 25, and the fact-finding to the chief of the fire department of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the facts of recognition of the Defendant Company 1’s liability for damages, the instant fire ought to be installed in partitions, etc. so as to prevent scattering, etc. that may occur from being melted work, but without taking such measures, F, an employee of the Defendant Company, is engaged in melting work, the instant building sand site panel.

arrow