logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.06.26 2015나2000
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of a detached house on the ground of Busan Young-gu D (hereinafter “instant house”), and the Defendant was awarded a contract for the construction of an apartment building with the Busan Young-gu and 197 parcel of land located adjacent to the instant house (hereinafter “instant construction”) and filed a report on the commencement of construction with the competent Gu office on November 3, 201.

B. On January 9, 2014, the Defendant received a decision on commencing the rehabilitation procedure in the Seoul Central District Court 2013 Ma291 rehabilitation case, and the Plaintiff reported the rehabilitation claim amounting to KRW 16.5 million to the above rehabilitation procedure.

C. On August 21, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the Plaintiff’s report on rehabilitation claims, and accordingly, the custodian took over the instant lawsuit.

In the above rehabilitation case against the defendant, the revised rehabilitation plan was approved on February 27, 2015, and the rehabilitation procedure was completed on March 26, 2015, the defendant taken over the lawsuit of this case on April 10, 2015.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 11, Eul evidence 12, facts with merit in this court, purport of whole pleadings]

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the construction work of the instant case occurred to the Plaintiff as follows.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to compensate for the total amount of damages 20 million won, 16.5 million won out of the total amount of damages, and damages for delay. Thus, the defendant is entitled to seek the confirmation of the rehabilitation claim.

① Damage due to rupture of the instant house: 15 million won:

3. Determination

A. The Defendant’s each of the recordings Nos. 1, 6, 8, 9, 13, and 15, as well as the images of the evidence Nos. 7, 10, and 16, as to the claim for damages due to the crack of the instant housing.

arrow