logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.01.17 2016가단324430
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 21,842,545 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from June 24, 2016 to January 17, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff owned a building with the 1st underground floor and the 7th ground floor located in Busan Seo-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant building”) and operated a kindergarten on the 2 through 5th floor of the said building, a general driving school on the 6th floor, and a specialized driving school on the 7th floor. From November 2009, the Defendant is performing the C Construction Work ordered by Busan Traffic Corporation (hereinafter “instant Construction Work”).

B. The instant building was completed on January 15, 2004, and was adjacent to the instant construction site at a distance of 16.34 meters from the instant construction site. The instant building was closely connected to the instant building and the installation of deep excavation works and soil walls.

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Busan Traffic Corporation claiming removal of buildings, etc. (2013Gahap48640) on the ground that noise, vibration, etc. generated in the course of the instant construction and the Busan Traffic Corporation’s neighboring construction of a new building, and the right to sunshine was infringed. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for removal of buildings, etc. (2013Gahap48640).

On May 25, 2016, the above court did not recognize the liability for damages caused by noise, vibration, etc. on the ground that the Busan Traffic Corporation is merely a contractor, but partially accepted the claim for damages caused by infringement of the right to sunshine and rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

On the other hand, prior to the instant construction, the condition of the instant building was examined as Grade B as having 83 cracks, etc. on the entire building. On June 2014, 2014, in the case of removal of the said building, there were 254 cracks on the entire building, including additional cracks on the rooftop, and there were found the key phenomenon of the rooftop floor finishing materials, and the leakage number of the 7th floor floor water on the top floor.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. One liability for damages.

arrow