손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The following facts are based on the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not dispute each other; (b) evidence Nos. 1 and 2; and (c) evidence Nos. 8 through 10, based on the overall purport of the pleadings.
On September 8, 2008, the Plaintiff obtained conditional repair permission with regard to the building owned by the Plaintiff in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant old building”) registered as Si-designated cultural heritage (hereinafter “instant old building”), stating the matters to be observed by the head of Gangseo-gu, the competent administrative agency, and agreed on November 11 of the same year to maintain the original form in accordance with the conditional repair permission by awarding a contract for the repair of the instant old building to the Defendant. The Defendant, in violation of the said construction contract, was performing construction by removing the instant old building and actually constructing it in violation of the said construction contract.
B. As above, the head of Gangseo-gu ordered the Plaintiff to remove the instant building on the ground that the building built by the Defendant (only “instant building” was constructed in violation of the aforementioned conditional repair permission, and imposed charges for compelling the performance of KRW 12,177,00 on December 12, 201, and KRW 12,177,000 on the Plaintiff on the ground that each of the charges for compelling the performance of the instant building was imposed on the Plaintiff. The Defendant, around that time, served as the chairperson from December 4, 2008 to December 4, 2011.
C. In this case’s damages claim(2012Gadan23133, which the Plaintiff filed against the Defendant, the said court rendered a judgment on June 12, 2013 that the Defendant was obliged to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 88,217,00,00 and the damages for delay, as the instant building was removed and the damages incurred to the Plaintiff due to the Defendant’s breach of the content of the said construction contract, and thus, the Defendant was obliged to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 65 million and the charges for compelling compliance.
In this case of this court No. 2013Na7504 against the above judgment, the above court ordered the dismissal of appeal on September 4, 2014, and the part of its reasoning.