logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원목포지원 2017.07.06 2016가단55606
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff is a party’s position, etc.) 126 ground-based 126 ground (14 Dong-dong 14,472, hereinafter “instant apartment”).

(2) On August 29, 2014, the Defendant Korea Land and Housing Corporation owned 300 households of the instant apartment, but concluded a real estate management and trust agreement with Defendant KB Real Estate Trust Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant KB Real Estate Trust”) on the said 300 households, and completed the registration of ownership transfer for the said 300 households on September 2, 2014.

B. The Plaintiff’s progress of construction works for the section for common use, etc. (1) The Plaintiff, following the resolution of the council of occupants’ representatives, brought KRW 395,959,30 (including value-added tax) from August 3, 2015 to December 3, 2015, into painting construction works for the section for common use of the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant painting construction works”).

(2) The term “instant waterproof Construction Works” means, from May 24, 2016 to July 2016, 108,225,700 won (including value-added tax) for the common areas of the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant waterproof Construction Works”).

(2) The Plaintiff used the long-term repair appropriations of KRW 154,456,685 and the warranty bond of KRW 241,502,714 as follows to pay the instant painting construction cost, and used KRW 108,225,700 for the waterproof construction of this case.

C. A lawsuit 1) around 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking payment of the cost of defect repair or the cost of defect repair against the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd., Ltd., a contractor of the instant apartment and the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd., which entered into a contract for defect repair of the instant apartment (Seoul Central District Court 2012Gahap80816). (2) At the time, the Plaintiff filed a new claim against the Defendant on the cost of defect repair as to the defect repair corresponding to the household owned by the Defendant

arrow