logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2015.06.18 2013가합4686
하자보수보증금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 116,856,242 among the Plaintiff and KRW 101,00,000 among the Plaintiff, shall be KRW 15,856,242 from January 1, 2014, and KRW 15,856,242.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an autonomous organization organized by the occupants to manage 182 apartment units and ancillary facilities (hereinafter “instant apartment units”) located in Jincheon-gu, Seogu, Daegu-gu. The Defendant is a company that guaranteed the warranty liability of Taecheon-gu Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul-do”), a contractor of the instant apartment units (hereinafter “the instant apartment”).

B. On February 20, 2008, as shown below, the Defendant guaranteed the warranty against defects for the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant warranty”). Under the warranty clause, the Defendant is obliged to perform the warranty against defects that occurred during the warranty period for the defect repair liability period for each type of work as stipulated in the attached Tables 6 and 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act, and the Defendant is obliged to pay the warranty against defects or to pay the cost for the defect repair.

[Attachment 1] The warranty period of the warranty of the warranty of 156,786,58 won from February 22, 2008 to February 21, 2009 (1 year) 156,786,558 won from February 22, 2008 to February 21, 2010 (2 years) 35,179,838 won from February 22, 201 to February 21, 2011 (3 years) 235,179,838 won from February 22, 2008 to February 21, 2008 to February 21, 2011; and

C. Thai, as the contractor of the instant apartment on February 22, 2008, sold to occupants after undergoing a pre-use inspection on the instant apartment on February 22, 2008.

However, in the construction of the apartment of this case, it was partially erroneous construction and modified construction, and there was a defect in the section for common use and section for exclusive use of the apartment of this case. Accordingly, there was an obstacle to the function, aesthetic, and safety on the apartment of this case, but the king did not comply with the plaintiff's request for defect repair.

The Defendant, which guaranteed the warranty liability, shall agree with the Plaintiff and the warranty period of the first to the third-year defect (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

arrow