하자보수보험금
1. The Defendant’s KRW 160,605,671 as well as 5% per annum from September 6, 2014 to December 24, 2014 to the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On June 9, 2006, the Plaintiff is an autonomous management body that consists of the occupants to manage three-party 3 apartment complexes located in Seongbuk-gu, Seongdong-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant apartment complex”).
The defendant is the project undertaker who constructed and sold the above apartment.
B. The Plaintiff received from 102 of the sectional owners of the apartment of this case the damage claim in lieu of defect repair, and the ratio occupied by the area of the exclusive ownership of the household that transferred the above damage claim to the total area of the exclusive ownership is 76.11%.
C. On the instant apartment, defects occurred due to non-construction, modified construction, defective construction, etc. based on the approval drawing for use. Of that, the expenses for repairing defects in common areas are 213,496,794 won [258,53,00 won - totaling 39,887,816 won of the cost for repairing defects based on the initial appraisal statement - the project approval drawing - the portion reduced by the appraiser according to the appraisal supplement commission (5,148,390 won in total).
[Plaintiff asserts that in addition to the aforementioned cost of repairing defects, KRW 39,887,816 should be additionally recognized based on the project approval drawing, but in principle, the drawing that forms the basis for the determination of defects is the drawings for approval for use (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da18762, Oct. 15, 2014). In light of the fact that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone constitutes a defect that the part asserted as a defect based on the project approval drawing is difficult to recognize.
The cost of repairing the damage claim in lieu of the defect repair to the Plaintiff is KRW 84,593,240 (per 109,790,000 (per 25,196,760) for the defect repair of the entire section of exclusive ownership - the cost of repairing the defect of the non-transferable section of exclusive ownership).
[Reasons for Recognition] Articles 208(3) and 3 of the Civil Procedure Act (Decision by Public Notice)
2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is an aggregate building.