beta
Text
The Defendant’s KRW 12,184,298 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from December 20, 2019 to September 24, 2020.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person operating a restaurant in the name of “D” on the second floor of the ground building C in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s building”). The Defendant is a person operating a lodging establishment in the name of “Eel” on the third floor of the above C-ground building (hereinafter “Defendant’s building”).
B. On July 30, 2016, water leakage (hereinafter “the first water leakage”) occurred in the Plaintiff’s building, the Plaintiff performed restoration work on October 2016, and the Plaintiff continued to do so after the completion of construction work, and the Defendant installed a boiler pipeline inside the Defendant’s building on January 2017, 2017.
C. On February 24, 2017, F Co., Ltd., which concluded an insurance contract with the Defendant (from June 27, 2016 to June 27, 2021) with respect to the Defendant building, paid KRW 11,90,000 insurance money to the Plaintiff as compensation for flood damage caused by the first leakage of water in the instant case.
Around November 2017, water leakage again from the Plaintiff’s building (hereinafter “the second water leakage”) has occurred, and the leakage is continued as of the date of the closing of argument.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 through 3, 5 evidence (including provisional number), Eul 7 through 9, witness G testimony, appraiser's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 2, 4 and 9, evidence Nos. 9, and evidence Nos. 9, G’s testimony, appraiser’s appraisal results, and the entire purport of the pleadings, the Defendant replaced the boiler with a gas boiler with the existing boiler at a high speed above the previous boiler in the process of remodelling the Defendant’s building on June 2016, but the costs of replacing the hot water pipe installed in the 2000s due to the cost issue did not replace the hot water pipe, and caused the deterioration thereof to be destroyed and damaged, thereby causing the instant primary water leakage in the Plaintiff’s building on July 30, 2016. After the occurrence of water leakage, the Defendant took measures, such as diving the boiler pipe. However, the Defendant took measures on Nov. 1, 2017.