logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.02.04 2013가합564649
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 167,533,656 and KRW 98,172,626 among the Plaintiff and KRW 2,827,374 from April 9, 2014.

Reasons

Basic Facts

A located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City(hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) is a building of 6th underground and 20th ground.

The instant building is a main complex building consisting of common areas, such as a parking lot, machine room, and stairs room, from the first to the fourth floor above the ground (103 Guide), from the 6th floor above the ground to the 17th floor above the ground (101, 102 108 households above the ground) and the remaining parts are common areas.

The plaintiff is an autonomous management body comprised of sectional owners of the building of this case.

Sexual Fran Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Ma Fran") is the executor of the new construction and sale business of the building in this case, and Pungsung Housing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Pung Housing") is the contractor of the building in this case.

The defendant (before the mutual change: Korean Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd.; hereinafter referred to as "the defendant") is a corporation for the purpose of the sale guarantee of the housing constructed and supplied by the project undertaker pursuant to the Housing Act, the construction of the housing for the performance of the warranty liability and the repair of defects, etc. of the housing for the performance of the above warranty, and is a guarantor who has entered into a housing sale guarantee contract with the Seongbuk and the building of this case.

The building of this case, after obtaining permission from the head of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City on November 1, 2004, entered the beginning of April 1, 2007, and obtained approval for use on February 22, 2010.

The Defendant entered into a housing unit sale guarantee contract and the performance of the unit sale guarantee contract and entered into a housing unit sale guarantee contract (hereinafter referred to as the “instant unit sale guarantee contract”) by setting the guarantee creditor, the main debtor, and the prospective creditor.

Since then, as Sung Fran, the principal obligor of the instant sales guarantee contract, was unable to perform the sales contract of the instant building, the Defendant processed the new construction business site of the instant building as a guarantee accident and selected the method of “sale execution.”

arrow