1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. On February 7, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she walked around the second office building of the Namyang-dong, Namyang-dong (hereinafter “the delivery of this case”) and she was liable to pay 4,871,680 won to the Plaintiff for damages caused by the said unlawful act on the ground that he/she was unable to work for one month due to the chest and knee in the inner part of the news block damaged by the Defendant’s management negligence.

2. Each of the descriptions and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 7, and 8 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) are insufficient to recognize the fact that the plaintiff was infected with the damaged news block of the India, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition, the "defect in the construction and management of a public structure" under Article 5 (1) of the State Compensation Act refers to a state in which the public structure, which was donated to a public purpose, is not equipped with safety ordinarily required for its use. In the construction and management of a public structure, it cannot be deemed that there is a defect in the construction or management of the public structure because it does not always have high level of safety to the extent that it maintains a perfect state at all times. Thus, the degree of duty to take protective measures imposed on the installer or manager of the public structure refers to the extent generally required by social norms in proportion to the danger of the public structure. Thus, in the case of a road which is a public structure, it is sufficient to have a relative safety expected by users of it, taking into account the relationship with other essential facilities and the financial, human and physical restrictions of the person who installed and manages it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da54998, Apr. 25, 200).