Court Rules Indoor Playground Owner 40% Liable After Elementary Student Falls From Structure

A court has ruled that the owner of an indoor play facility, where usage is recommended for children aged 7 and under, bears partial liability for damages after an elementary student fell and was injured while playing on a structure, citing inadequate safety measures and age restrictions.

According to the legal community on September 20, Judge Lee Do-kyung of Civil Division 14 at the Suwon District Court partially ruled against the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by the playground owner seeking a confirmation of non-existence of debt against the injured child and her mother, as well as in a counterclaim for damages filed by the victim's side.

Consequently, the court ordered the owner to pay 10,039,559 won to the victimized child and 2.5 million won to her mother.

The accident occurred in April 2023 at a free children's play facility inside a large shopping mall in Gwonseon-gu, Suwon, Gyeonggi Province.

The victim, who was an elementary student at the time, visited the playground with her mother and fell to the floor while playing on top of a baseball cap-shaped structure.

Due to the accident, the child suffered a severe wrist bone fracture and had to undergo major surgery, including pin fixation.

The site of the accident was a free, open-access play facility primarily recommended for infants and toddlers aged 7 and under.

Although a notice was posted at the entrance stating that "elementary students are requested to refrain from entering and guardians must accompany them," strict age control for entry was not enforced, allowing the victim to enter without any particular restriction.

The baseball cap-shaped structure in question was over 1 meter high with a steep slope from the top toward the floor.

The owner filed the lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of liability, arguing that there was no obligation to pay damages given that age limits and guardian accompaniment rules were posted at the entrance.

However, the court rejected the owner's argument, pointing out poor safety management at the site.

It stated that the notice at the entrance alone could not be regarded as fulfilling the duty to prevent risks.

It was found that there were no warnings or caution signs anywhere around the structure instructing children not to climb it, and although a safety manager was designated on paper, they were frequently away from their post.

Other employees who merely prepared and sold drinks at a cafe connected to the facility were insufficient to control the premises.

Judge Lee acknowledged the owner's liability, stating, "Despite the risk of falls, there was no warning sign on the structure, and control over the age of entering children as well as safety management by a supervisor were not adequately carried out. The owner failed to fulfill the protective measures required under general societal norms in proportion to the risks of the facility."

However, taking into account the failure of the victim's mother to fulfill her duty of protection and supervision, the court limited the owner's liability to 40 percent of the total damages.

Judge Lee explained the grounds for limiting liability, noting, "Even though rules were posted at the entrance advising against entry by elementary students and urging caution for safety under the responsibility of guardians, the guardian failed to provide appropriate restraint or supervision."

(Photo: Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.