손해배상(기)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On May 2, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a material supply contract with the Defendant on the structural parts of the extension construction connecting two existing buildings on the ground B (hereinafter “instant building”) on Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “instant contract”).
B. The Defendant’s employee C visited the site of the instant building extension project to check the size, quantity, etc. of the required steel materials.
On May 8, 2012, the Defendant delivered steel products under the instant contract to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 12,430,000 to the Defendant on the same day.
C. During the process of the instant extension project, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to resist and correct the steel materials supplied by the Defendant and the home in which the thickness does not comply with the contract standards, but the Defendant did not comply with the request. However, the Plaintiff paid KRW 877,200 to the construction business operator who was in charge of the assembly at the time, and additionally paid KRW 877,20 in accordance with the required size, cut and melting the steel materials, and completed the extension project after taking some repair measures, such as regulating voltss.
Since then, the building of this case occurred on the short outer wall near the steel framed supplied by the Defendant. While the Plaintiff was repairing it, it is necessary to repair it at present due to the occurrence of additional cracks, and the cost of its repair is KRW 7,150,000 (6.5 million value added tax) when based on May 2, 2012, which is the time of the conclusion and implementation of the contract of this case.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8, Eul evidence 1 to 14 (including each number), witness D and C's testimony, the result of the commission of appraisal to appraiser E by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above recognition of the liability for damages, the defendant's negligence, which neglected the actual survey of the field, is short of the length of the plaintiff.