손해배상(기)
Defendant’s KRW 1,858,656,869 and KRW 1,506,431,310 among the Plaintiff and KRW 352,25,59 among the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an autonomous management organization that consists of the occupants to manage 11 apartment units A of Type III Special Self-Governing City and 982 households of the same 982 (hereinafter “instant apartment”).
2) The Defendant is the project undertaker who sold the instant apartment.
The Intervenor B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Intervenor B”) is a contractor for the instant apartment, and the Intervenor C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Intervenor C”) supplied the doors installed in the instant apartment. The Intervenor D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Intervenor C”) supplied the doors installed in the instant apartment. The Intervenor D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Intervenor D”) supplied and installed the home network system installed in the instant apartment.
B. From August 27, 2013, the Defendant approved the use of the instant apartment and delivered the instant apartment, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the several parties for each of the instant apartment units from around August 27, 2013. The instant apartment units approved the use on January 8, 2015, and thereafter, the instant apartment units were delivered to the sectional owners from around that time.
Since then, the Plaintiff, an autonomous management organization of the apartment of this case, was organized.
(c)
1) As the Intervenor B did not perform the part to be built in the new construction of the apartment in this case, or revised differently from the drawing for the defective construction or use of the apartment in this case, defects such as rupture, water leakage, etc. have occurred in the section for common use and section for exclusive use of the apartment in this case, and thereby, the apartment in this case has a functional, safety, and aesthetic impairment.
2) The Plaintiff requested the Defendant to repair various defects arising from the instant apartment from January 26, 2016 at the request of the occupant or the sectional owner.
3) Upon such request of the Plaintiff, the Defendant and the Intervenor repaired a part of the defects, but the apartment of this case still remains the section for common use in attached Form 1.