(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.10.23 2018가합1978

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.10.23 2018가합1978

손해배상(기)

Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion is the owner of the apartment house indicated in the attached list (hereinafter "the defendant apartment"), and the plaintiff is the owner of the apartment house C located below the defendant's apartment house (hereinafter "the plaintiff apartment house").

From May 2016, due to the leakage of the Defendant’s toilet and the defects in the part of the Defendant’s bendaco zone, the Plaintiff’s apartment toilet ice and fung were generated in the Plaintiff’s apartment toilet ice ice ice, damaged beeas and fung were generated, and the stone recovery was stockpiled.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 80,00,000 for the toilet storage work and the boiler construction work cost incurred by the Plaintiff due to water leakage and defects, and damages for delay thereof. ② The Defendant is obligated to perform water leakage prevention work on the Defendant’s apartment toilet and beeasy mold.

Furthermore, since the defendant is likely to violate the obligation of performing the above water leakage prevention project within the short period, the defendant is entitled to pay the money calculated at the rate of KRW 500,000 per month from the day following the expiration of the above period if the above obligation is not fulfilled within one month from the date of delivery of the original copy of the judgment of this case as indirect compulsory performance.

2. It is not enough to recognize that the entries and videos of the evidence Nos. 1 to 10 were generated from the Defendant’s apartment toilet, but there was a defect in the Defendant’s apartment model, and that the damage was caused to the Plaintiff. There is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion, which is premised on the occurrence of damages due to leakage of the Defendant apartment toilets and the defect of the benda mold, is without merit without further review.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2018.06.05 2017가단14818

-수원지방법원 2021.04.29 2020나72652

-창원지방법원진주지원 2016.05.13 2015가단3309

-수원지방법원안산지원 2019.11.21 2019가합149

-수원지방법원안양지원 2015.04.02 2014가단7290