beta
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2016.05.19 2014가합100381

하자보수금청구의 소

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 726,468,377 as well as 5% per annum from November 5, 2015 to May 19, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Under the Industrial Cluster Development and Factory Establishment Act, the Plaintiff is an autonomous management body consisting of sectional owners of Eshan 21 (hereinafter “instant building”), an apartment-type factory located in Busan Shipping Daegu, which was newly constructed around June 2009, and the Defendant is a project proprietor who constructed and sold the instant building and is a project proprietor and a construction contractor who constructed the instant building.

B. As the Defendant did not construct the part to be constructed while constructing the instant building, or constructed a defective construction or a modified construction differently from the completed drawings, there was a defect, such as the description of the summary sheet by the attached Table list, in the section for common use and section for exclusive use of the instant building

C. Of the total 287 households of the sectional ownership of the instant building, 274 households transferred the Plaintiff the right to claim repair of defects and the right to claim damages in lieu of repair of defects to the Defendant, and each delegated the right to notify assignment of claims to the Plaintiff.

On August 31, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the assignment of the above assignment of claims by serving the instant complaint and the written brief on August 31, 2015.

The total sum of the total area of the entire area of the instant building is 35,526.51 square meters, and the total sum of the area of the entire area of the household that transferred the right to claim damages to the Plaintiff is 33,809 square meters.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment on the occurrence and scope of defects

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of the defect in the failure to install each floor’s meeting room equipment and facilities is as follows: (a) the instant building was introduced as “a high-tech teletic facility that enhances the business dignity” in the car gate, and posting the image pictures of the meeting room equipped with tables, chairs, and smoking facilities, and advertising is included in the sales contract; (b) thus, the failure to install the meeting room equipment and equipment constitutes non-construction defect.