logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.08.13 2018가단120813
하자보수금등 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 17, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant and the Plaintiff to newly construct a house (hereinafter “instant house”) on the ground of the Chang-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Chang-gu, Changwon-si, by setting the construction amount of KRW 525,40,000 as a contractor and setting the construction amount of KRW 525,40,000.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

Around 2017, the Defendant completed construction under the instant contract, and the Plaintiff did not pay the Defendant KRW 38,000,000 out of the construction cost under the instant contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1's entry, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. There are many defects in the instant housing, and damages in lieu of the defect repair are KRW 25,437,500.

In addition, the Defendant, at the time of the instant contract, did not pay the design cost of KRW 13,134,00 and supervision cost of KRW 7,504,140 to the Defendant, and did not pay the said design cost and supervision cost on behalf of the Defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 8,075,640 and delay damages for the construction amount of KRW 25,437,50 and KRW 20,638,140, which the Plaintiff has to pay to the Defendant, after deducting or offsetting the construction amount of KRW 38,00,000 that the Plaintiff has to pay to the Defendant.

B. The defendant merely did not receive 38,000,000 won out of the construction cost from the plaintiff, and it cannot be recognized that there is a defect in the housing of this case. The design cost and supervision cost of the housing of this case are borne by the plaintiff, who is the owner of the building, so the plaintiff cannot respond to

3. Determination

A. In full view of the appraiser D’s appraisal result and the overall purport of pleading as to the claim for damages in lieu of defect repair, it is reasonable to deem that the instant housing has the following defects in construction.

The details of defects defects are as follows: non-use of the main 761,200 toilet screen 2,504,700 inside cleaning and door line, etc. which are defective 349,80.

arrow