logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.15 2015가단5275132
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a juristic person established as an insurer of the health insurance pursuant to the National Health Insurance Act; Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City is a local government that establishes and operates an outdoor swimming pool as seen below; Defendant Dongbu Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Dongbu Fire”) is an insurance company that has concluded an insurance contract for liability for sports facilities with regard to the outdoor swimming pool as the insured.

B. At around 14:00 on August 5, 2014, A, a national health insurance policyholder, obtained a swimming pool in the outdoor swimming pool in 25 located in Songpa-dong, Songpa-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant swimming pool”) and suffered an injury in which the head was worn out on the swimming pool floor, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 23,265,930,00 in total, as indicated in the attached Table of Calculation of Damages, to a treatment institution.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the person who installed and manages the swimming pool of this case, and is responsible for the construction owner of the structure as stipulated in Article 758 of the Civil Act, and the Defendant Dong-gu is the insurer who was the insured of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and is liable to pay the insurance money. Therefore, the Plaintiff is liable to pay the Corporation’s charges 23,265,930 won and damages for delay to the Plaintiff who subrogated the victim’

B. The defect in the installation and preservation of a structure under Article 758(1) of the Civil Act refers to a state in which a structure fails to meet safety requirements ordinarily for its use. In determining whether such safety requirements are met, it shall be determined on the basis of whether the installer and custodian of the structure in question fulfilled his/her duty to take protective measures to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the risk of the structure, and even if an accident occurred in the structure, it shall not be subject to the ordinary usage of the structure.

arrow