logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.10.25 2019나49816
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff ordering payment is revoked.

The defendant shall make the plaintiff 25,945.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 201, the Plaintiff registered his/her business with the trade name “E”, and operated the wholesale and retail store of sports clothing, etc. at the first floor and the underground floor (hereinafter “instant store”) of the building located in Busan Seo-gu D (hereinafter “E”).

B. Around July 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for leasing the instant store from the Intervenor joining the Defendant with the Defendant, respectively, and determined the deposit of KRW 140 million, monthly rent of KRW 6 million (value-added tax classification), and its duration from July 10, 2016 to July 9, 2021.

C. On April 4, 2017, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Intervenor joining the Defendant to purchase the entire building including the instant store, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the said building on August 16, 2017.

The Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded on September 22, 2017 between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

Preparation of a lease contract containing the same contents as the lease contract stated in the paragraph, and Article 8 of the contract stipulates that "The lessee shall make a full effort to manage the product in order to prevent any damage caused by water leakage in the future, and the lessor shall make every effort to prevent water leakage in the future."

E. Among the instant stores, the Plaintiff kept the instant products, such as clothes, on the basement level, but around September 12, 2017, there was an accident in which rainwater on the rooftop flows into underground floors and the said products are flooded (hereinafter “the instant flood accident”).

F. As to the instant flood accident, the appraiser F of the first instance trial concluded that the instant flood accident was “the rainwater was not drained due to the lack of drainage capacity of the rooftop drainage hole against the rainfall due to the concentration of heavy rain, and rainwater was laid on the rooftop, and that the relevant rainwater was flowed into the first floor underground through the wall of the entrance and exit of the first floor and the stairs room, as it is anticipated that the relevant rainwater going beyond the flood control threshold of the rooftop entrance and exit.”

[Reasons for Recognition]

arrow