logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.17 2016가합580857
손해배상(기)
Text

1. As to Defendant B’s KRW 173,208,895 and KRW 162,154,049 among the Plaintiff, Defendant B shall be from June 17, 2018 to 8,36.

Reasons

Under the underlying facts, the following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4-6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including a branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the appraisal result of the appraiser F (hereinafter the "Appraiser"), the entire purport of each request for the supplementation of expert evidence against the appraiser.

The plaintiff is an autonomous management organization comprised of sectional owners or occupants (hereinafter referred to as "sectional owners, etc.") to manage 660 households (general 303 households for sale in lots, 357 households for lease in lots) of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government apartment complex A (hereinafter referred to as "the apartment of this case").

Defendant B is an executor who sold the instant apartment, and the supplementary intervenors of Defendant B Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Supplementary Intervenor”) are the trial contractor who constructed the instant apartment by being jointly awarded a contract with Defendant B for the construction of the instant apartment from Defendant B.

The Intervenor joining the Defendant constructed the instant apartment on January 12, 2009 with the approval of use on the apartment, and did not construct the part to be constructed in accordance with the design drawing, or modified the construction or defective construction differently from the design drawing. As a result, there was a defect, such as rupture, water, etc., in the instant apartment.

The Plaintiff requested the Defendant’s Intervenor to repair the defects prior to the instant lawsuit at the request of the sectional owner, etc. of the apartment, and accordingly, the Defendant’s Intervenor repaired some defects.

Nevertheless, the repair cost of the present apartment is still the repair cost of the remaining parts except the consented outer walls, rooftop/pent roof, stairs and EV holes/EV mechanical room, main entrance/ exit/prottur, and underground feet part among the common areas of the present apartment in common areas of the present apartment.

annex 2.3

arrow