logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2016.11.03 2015가단109481
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 23,760,100 as well as annual 5% from November 3, 2014 to November 3, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of wholesale, retail, service business, etc. of household appliances. The Plaintiff is a person who runs the household appliances sales business under the trade name of “A,00D stores” from the first floor (hereinafter “Plaintiff shop”) underground of the building located in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “D”). The Defendant is a person who operates the household appliances shop with the trade name “E” from the first floor (hereinafter “Defendant shop”).

B. On November 3, 2014, as coffees and ice-supply pipes owned and managed by the Defendant’s store were worn out and destroyed (hereinafter “instant water leakage”). Since the water leakage of this case flows into the Plaintiff shop following the Plaintiff’s shop, electronic equipment listed in the “Details of Damage” list, which the Plaintiff’s store stored in the Plaintiff shop (hereinafter “instant electronic equipment”) suffered flood damage.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 2, 5 or 11, each entry in Gap 2, 5 or 11, the F of this Court, and the fact inquiry results on lot damage insurance company, the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole.

2. Determination:

A. 1) In light of the above recognition of liability, it is reasonable to view that the above pipelines lack safety to be installed for the reason that coffees and ice water supply pipes owned and managed by the Defendant were damaged and leaked. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for damages caused by the defects in the preservation of the above pipes, which are structures, as a person who owns and manages the above damaged pipelines. 2) The Defendant’s judgment as to the Defendant’s assertion as to the instant claim was based on the fact that the rubbers were newly installed at the facility team of the F Co., Ltd. immediately after the instant water leakage, and the Defendant was released from the F Co., Ltd. on November 4, 2014, thereby causing damages caused by the inundation of the instant electronic equipment due to the occurrence of double water leakage.

arrow