logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.04.19 2014가단5098062
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

The Plaintiff is the owner of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 6th and 1st underground floor, Class 1, Class 2 neighborhood living facilities, accommodation facilities, and amusement facilities (hereinafter “instant building”). Defendant K non-Real Estate Trust Co., Ltd. is a building owner who newly constructs a building of 20th and underground floors on the ground above the land and 2nd underground level on the land other than C’s site after receiving trust from the Gabable global trust, and is a building owner who constructed a building of 20th and underground floors on the land other than C’s site. Defendant KM industry is a construction contractor of the said new building construction (hereinafter “instant construction”). There is no dispute between the parties

The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendants had serious damage to the building of this case, such as ruptures caused cracks in the building of this case due to shocks such as vibration, leaving the wall fast, and mashing, etc., and caused serious defects in the safety and durability of the building of this case, such as water leakage due to the damage of piping facilities, etc., and that the Plaintiff had suffered significant damage and losses to the lodging business in the building of this case due to dust, noise and water leakage, etc. generated from the construction of this case, and that the Plaintiff had suffered considerable damage and losses to the lodging business in the building of this case. The Plaintiff claimed against the Defendants for payment of the amount stated in the claim, as compensation for damage equivalent to the expenses incurred in the repair and safety reinforcement of the building of this case, and for business damage.

In this case, the defendants implemented the construction work of this case only with the statements and images of Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 10 submitted by the plaintiff, which caused defects as alleged by the plaintiff, or the dust and noise generated in the construction work of this case exceed the tolerance limit which can be accepted by social norms, or the plaintiff's damage reaches the purport amount of the claim.

arrow