Chucky owned a restaurant, which catered to families with children. The restaurant featured a special play area containing various play structures and climbing devices, which the children could use after finishing their meal, while their parents ate at their leisure. Chucky was aware that several children who lived nearby were in the habit of climbing over the low fence which surrounded the play area, even though he had signs warning that use of the play area was limited to restaurant customers. Unknown to Chucky, the large metal spring which held up a hobbyhorse in the play area had prematurely rusted almost completely through, and lost most of its structural integrity. The rust was not visible through the paint on the hobbyhorse. Conrad, a six year-old neighborhood resident who had climbed into the play area was riding the hobbyhorse when the support snapped, sending Conrad headfirst into the ground. The boy suffered a broken nose. Conrad's representative brought an appropriate action against Chucky to recover for the personal injuries Conrad suffered in the fall off the hobbyhorse. What result?

Select one:

A.Chucky, because the yard was posted with signs limiting use to restaurant customers, and Conrad was not a customer.

B.Chucky, because he was not actually aware of the rusted hobbyhorse support, and Conrad was a trespasser.

C.Conrad, because an six-year-old would not recognize the danger presented by a rusted support to the hobbyhorse.

D.Conrad, because a landowner must exercise due care to inspect for and discover concealed artificial conditions, which threaten known trespassers.