1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

1. The plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff is engaged in the singran business on the second floor of the building located in Busan Metropolitan Government C (hereinafter "the building of this case"). The defendant is the lessee of the first floor underground of the building of this case.

On July 2, 2014, the Defendant destroyed the signboard owned by the Plaintiff, which was installed at the entrance, etc. of the instant building, while performing remodeling works for the first floor underground of the instant building leased by himself.

A total of 3,553,00 won is required in order to newly attach damaged signboards, and the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for the above damages.

2. Determination

A. According to the facts without dispute, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of Gap evidence No. 4-1 through No. 4 as a whole, the defendant leased the first floor of the building of this case, and then requested a person who was D (one-day) to remove an entrance set up underground in order to repair the inside. On July 2, 2014, the above D, at the Defendant’s request, set off a car-type signboard owned by the plaintiff, which was installed above the entrance of the building of this case, while leaving the entrance of the building of this case, and then, D, at the Defendant’s request, set off a car-type four-dimensional signboard, which was set up above the entrance of the building of this case, and it can be recognized that D, therefore, destroyed a shot-type signboard.

B. In the contract for health, unless there is gross negligence on the part of the contractor or his employee, the contractor shall not be liable for the damages inflicted on a third party regarding the work. However, in case where the contractor has reserved the right of detailed direction and supervision on the work progress and method of the contractor and has given specific direction and supervision on the execution of the work, the relationship between the contractor and the contractor does not substantially differ from the relationship between the employer and the employee, and therefore, the contractor cannot be exempted from the employer liability under Article 756 of the Civil Act as to the damages inflicted on a third party due to the illegal acts of the contractor or his employee.