Air Conditioner Breakdown and Water Leak Disputes: Who Bears the Liability, "Landlord vs. Tenant"?

When the early summer heat begins, conflicts over air conditioner water leaks start to arise in studio apartments, villas, apartments, and the like. This is because a breakdown is belatedly discovered when an air conditioner left unused all winter is operated after a long time, or a water leak from the device causes secondary damage affecting the unit below. The problem is that the parties keep passing the buck over responsibility for repair costs or wallpapering costs, ultimately escalating into a mudslinging fight. Therefore, when such a problem arises, it is more important than anything to grasp clear legal criteria and respond strategically from the early stage.

When damage occurs due to an air conditioner leak, the target of a damages claim varies depending on the cause of the leak. The most common conflict is the dispute over responsibility between landlord and tenant. Under Article 623 of our Civil Act, the landlord bears the obligation to maintain the condition necessary for the lessee to use and profit from the object in accordance with the terms of the contract (the repair obligation). On this basis, precedent holds that if it is not a minor problem that the lessee can easily fix without any particular cost, but damage of a degree that makes use and profit for the purpose of the contract impossible unless repaired, then the landlord has the repair obligation.

By this criterion, in the case of an air conditioner, when an essential problem arises in its function itself—such as the failure of core parts like the compressor or main board, or a refrigerant gas leak due to aged piping—this constitutes a large-scale repair, and the landlord bears the repair responsibility. This is because an air conditioner constitutes basic equipment of modern residential life.

On the other hand, simple maintenance or replacement of consumables—such as replacing remote control batteries, cleaning filters, or simply charging refrigerant gas—is regarded as a small-scale repair, and it is generally borne by the lessee. Also, if the tenant arbitrarily changes the drainage hose or fails to empty the condensate tank in time, causing the water to overflow, this constitutes the lessee's negligence in management (violation of the duty of care of a good manager), so the liability for damages falls on the lessee.

However, not all leak liability is confined solely to between the landlord and tenant. If, in an apartment or the like, the cause is not an individual household's problem but rather that the common drainpipe through which the air conditioner discharge water of multiple households flows is clogged with foreign substances, causing the water to back up into a unit, then in this case a damages claim must be filed against the residents' representative meeting or the management office, which bears the management responsibility for the common areas.

Legal response against the construction company must also be examined in the case of a new building. In an apartment or officetel built only a short time ago, a leak may occur due to a structural defect in the embedded piping of a system air conditioner or defective waterproofing work. Since this is not the fault of the tenant or others but defective construction, one must directly demand defect repair from the seller and construction company and claim compensation for the secondary damage.

So how should a tenant suffering in the immediate heat respond? Rather than recklessly repairing it with one's own money first, one must clearly notify the responsible party (mainly the landlord)—via content-certified mail and the like—of the fact that repair is needed, together with photos and videos of the broken area. If the landlord does not carry out the repair within a considerable period even after notification, the lessee may first repair it at their own expense and then claim the cost from the landlord. This is a claim for costs due to the landlord's non-performance of the repair obligation, and precedent sometimes recognizes it as a claim for reimbursement of necessary expenses. If the landlord ultimately does not pay the cost, the lessee may refuse to pay rent in proportion to the loss incurred from being unable to use the air conditioner until the repair is done, and may assert that the repair-cost claim be deducted from the deposit to be returned when the lease contract terminates.

Attorney Shin Hye-jin of Daeryun LLC said, "Conversely, from the landlord's standpoint, if you face a situation where a tenant unilaterally calls in an expensive private company and then claims excessive repair costs or deducts them from the rent, you do not need to accept this unconditionally. In this case, you should request an objective opinion on the cause of the breakdown from a leak-detection company or repair technician, and examine whether the type of defect constitutes a large-scale repair, or whether it is a violation of the tenant's duty of care or a common-pipe defect," adding, "If the tenant's negligence is clear or it constitutes a small-scale repair yet the tenant unilaterally fails to pay rent, when the arrears reach two months' worth you can lawfully notify termination of the lease contract under Article 640 of the Civil Act and deduct the damage cost and overdue rent from the deposit."

Early summer air conditioner leak disputes, coupled with the discomfort index, easily escalate into emotional fights, such as hurling abusive language at each other. Rather than recklessly avoiding contact or withholding rent and confronting each other emotionally, it is more important than anything to objectively grasp the cause of the breakdown. Afterward, receiving the assistance of a legal expert and taking systematic procedures such as sending content-certified mail can be a wise way to protect each party's property and rights.

Enet News Reporter Park Jeong-woo (woo@enetnews.co.kr)

[Read Full Article]
Air Conditioner Breakdown and Water Leak Disputes: Who Bears the Liability, "Landlord vs. Tenant"? (Go to link)