logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.08.25 2017나2004629
손해배상(건)
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the lower court against Defendant Dae Ship Construction Co., Ltd. in excess of the amount ordered to pay below.

Reasons

In light of the above facts, it is reasonable to view this part as a defect, in light of the following: (a) it is reasonable to execute rupture prevention materials in accordance with the standards for the above specifications; (b) it is deemed that the rupture prevention materials were used to be omitted in the completion drawing; (c) it would normally be caused by omission in the rupture prevention work that is reasonable to reflect in the drawing; (d) the photograph attached to the appraisal document shows that the ruptures were observed; and (e) the appraiser also expressed that it is a defect that may interfere with the aesthetic view; and (e) it is difficult for the appraiser to view that the

The defendants' assertion in this part is without merit.

[51] Change of the size of the entrance of each household shelter (3,007,002 won) [52] Change of the size of the entrance of each household shelter (3,007,02 won for the construction of the previous house) 74 type 2, 3, multi-purpose rooms 3, 121 type 2, 2, 3, 4, change work (WD-10*22), change work (13,146,270 won) on the ground that the size of the entrance of this part (2,100m) was reduced by more than 2,200m (2,200m).

However, considering the height of the entrance that is normally designed and constructed, the measurements of this part of the completion drawings fall under an obvious clerical error, and there is no particular obstacle to functional, scenic, or safety, so this part of the modified construction does not fall under the defect.

① On the completion drawing unit floor plan (A-202, 212, 222) and creative sight table (A-501, 511, 521), there is no ground to regard the above description as a clerical error; ② it is reasonable to regard it as a clerical error in the case of construction differently from the completion drawing; ③ appraiser also expressed the opinion that this part of the modified construction constitutes a defect that interferes with the function of the building, such as furniture, through the entrance.

arrow