손해배상
1. Each of the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. On September 11, 2014, Plaintiff A entered into a sales contract for E commercial buildings (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”) newly constructed with Defendant and Gwangjin-si, E, 102 (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”).
Plaintiff
C With the consent of the defendant on October 13, 2015, the status of the buyer of the commercial building of this case shall be succeeded by the plaintiff A, and the registration of ownership transfer shall be completed on January 15, 2016.
Meanwhile, on June 23, 2014, the instant commercial building was constructed as building stones with a width of 5.3 meters in front and between the entrance and the right wall at the time of the building permission. However, on May 31, 2015, the front width was reduced to 4.5 meters in front, and the size was reduced, and the building was changed to be constructed as building stones with a width of 0.74 meters in width between the entrance and the right wall.
[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap 1-3 evidence, Gap 5, and 8 evidence, and the fact-finding results on the light trading market of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. On September 11, 2014, as at the time of the sale contract, the Defendant-seller presented to the Plaintiff A a map that the front door of the instant commercial building is exposed more than the right wall because the front door of the instant commercial building is in contact with the building permit drawing or the completion drawing. Accordingly, the Plaintiff entered into the sale contract on the instant commercial building.
Unlike the drawings presented at the time of the sales contract, the Plaintiffs suffered damages of KRW 20,473,50 as the area of full exposure to the commercial building was reduced, KRW 18,987,50, KRW 10,000, KRW 49,461,00 in total, as the area of full exposure to the commercial building was reduced.
Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiffs 49,461,00 won and damages for delay due to the tort.
B. Each of the descriptions of the judgment unit, Gap evidence 6, Gap evidence 7-1, and Eul evidence 7-2 are the front door of the commercial building of this case to the plaintiff at the time of the sales contract on September 11, 2014.