beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) regarding the principal lawsuit shall be revoked, and that part shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 201, the Plaintiff contracted the Defendant with the construction cost of KRW 480,00,000,000 for the construction of the 5th underground floor building (hereinafter “instant building”) in Dongjak-gu Seoul, Seoul. The Defendant commenced construction around March 22, 201 and obtained approval for the use of the instant building on September 19, 201.
B. The Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 430 million to the Defendant for construction cost under the said contract.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the main claim
A. The Plaintiff’s cause of claim lies in the instant building: ① the same defect as indicated in the attached Table 2 attached hereto; ② the same defect as indicated in the attached Table 3 attached hereto; ③ the emergency exit of the first floor underground and the entrance non-construction defect; thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 27,330,000 (including the cost of repair of the defect: ① KRW 13920,000 for the cost of repair of the defect; ② KRW 62,590 for the cost of repair of the defect; ③ KRW 820,000 for the cost of repair of the defect) due to damages in lieu of the above defect.
B. “A defect in a building” refers to a structure or functional defect different from the contents stipulated in the construction contract, or a defect that has not been properly equipped with ordinary quality in light of the transactional concept. Whether a defect exists shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, including the content of the contract between the parties concerned, whether the relevant building was constructed in conformity with the design design, and whether the construction-related legislation meets the standards (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da16851, Dec. 9, 2010). In the event of a defect in an object completed in the contract, the contractor may claim against the contractor for damages in lieu of the repair of the defect or the repair of the defect, but at the same time the contractor does not have significant importance.