1. The Defendant: (a) against Plaintiff A, KRW 10,341,978; and (b) against Plaintiff B, KRW 12,773,278; and (c) against each said money, from March 16, 2018 to March 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are required from the first floor of the building located in Kimcheon-si C in Kimcheon-si

A school dan is operated by each person.

C. However, around March 16, 2018, the water supply pipes connected to the building of the plaintiffs' business site (hereinafter "the water supply pipes of this case") generated water leakage due to the defluence of the parts laid underground. The water supply pipes flown into the plaintiffs' business site through the ground stairs, which was lowered into the plaintiffs' business site, and the total quantity of the water was flooded by 2-30 centimeters.

(hereinafter referred to as “the flood accident of this case”). 【The ground for recognition of the flood of this case’s case’s 【The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2, and 9 (including serial documentary evidence number; hereinafter the same shall apply), each entry, witness E’s testimony, and witness F’s testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the occurrence of liability for damages and the recognition of the restriction above, the parts of the water supply pipe of this case where water leakage occurred fall under the water supply facilities from the borderline of the Domoto to the water meter, and they belong to the possession of Kimcheon-si pursuant to Article 11(3) of the Kimcheon-si Water Supply Ordinance (Evidence No. 10), and considering the whole purport of the pleadings in addition to the entries in Eul evidence No. 2 and witness F's testimony, it can be seen that the water leakage occurred in the water supply pipe of this case where water is laid down below 1 meter below the underground level of the site packed by concrete, so it is reasonable to view the flood accident of this case as the water supply pipe of this case where water leakage flows into the ground floor, and the water leakage from the water supply pipe so that the water supply pipe of this case reaches the ground floor, thereby flowing into the place of business through the plaintiffs' underground stairs of the business site.

Therefore, the defendant is merely a minor water leakage so that the flood accident of this case occurred, and when considering that the owner of the building of the plaintiffs' business place reported the reduction of water leakage, it is reasonable to view it as a flood caused by piping heat inside the building.