logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.08.13 2015가합200551
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. At around 00:10 on January 31, 2014, D entered the 24 hours set soup “E soup” (hereinafter “instant soup”) operated by the Defendant, and was discovered at the yellow land around 03:10 on the same day after death.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

Although the body of the network D (hereinafter referred to as the “the network”) was formed on the right side of the network, the body was checked with red, and was out of the body, the private person was not clearly revealed.

However, in addition to the problem of the blood relationship generated in the course of making soup of the instant case, there was no other external wounds related to the death.

C. The plaintiffs are children of the deceased.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 7 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment on this issue

A. The defendant, a public bath business operator of the plaintiffs' assertion, should prohibit the position of a person who is deemed difficult to normally use a bath due to drinking, etc., but neglected to enter the soup of this case by the deceased, who is a state of drinking, and neglected to do so even though he had a duty of care to prevent safety accidents in the soup.

Since the above negligence of the defendant caused the accident of this case, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiffs who are the inheritors of the deceased for the damages caused by the accident of this case.

B. 1) According to Articles 4(1) and (7) and 20(2)3 of the Public Health Control Act and Article 7 [Attachment Table 4] 2(a) through (d) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, if the Defendant was negligent in allowing soup access to the deceased, the business operator who operates a bath under Article 2 of the same Act is deemed to have a health hazard to his/her users.

The facilities and equipment related to the business shall be sanitary and non-existence of persons.

arrow