beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
(a) Defendant-si shall be KRW 16,761,712 as well as 5% per annum from April 18, 2017 to October 10, 2019.
Reasons
1. As to the claim against the defendant Young-si
A. As to the claim for damages under Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act, the Plaintiff is entitled to the damages claim under Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act. The Plaintiff is a sectioned building building E, F, G, H, I, J, H, and K (hereinafter “Plaintiff-sectioned building”).
) the parking lot in front of the parking lot (hereinafter referred to as “instant parking lot”).
(2) The Defendant-si asserts that Defendant-si is liable for damages under Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Defendant-si erred in packing construction and inflicted damages on the Plaintiff’s part of the Plaintiff, and thus, Defendant-si is liable for damages under the former part of Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act. Since the former part of Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act provides that “When any damage has been inflicted on another person due to any defect in the construction or management of roads, rivers or other public structures, the State or local governments shall compensate for such damage.” Thus, in order to recognize Defendant-si’s liability for damages under the foregoing provision, the public structures offered for public purposes are in a state of failing to meet the safety ordinarily
public structures refer to fluids or physical facilities, whether co-owned or privately-owned by administrative bodies, which are supplied for a specific public purpose, and the management of such public structures means that the State or any other administrative body has de facto control over the public structures.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 80Da2478, Jul. 7, 1981). 3, however, there is no evidence to acknowledge the instant parking lot as public structures.
Rather, according to the purport of the evidence No. 69-2 and No. 69-2 and No. 2-1 of the evidence No. 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings, the instant parking lot, which was conducted on April 2017 at the Defendant Young-si, is a commercial parking lot used by the customers of D commercial buildings or the occupants thereof, which is the commercial parking lot used by the Defendant Young-si.