logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.07.18 2017나59079
손해배상(기)
Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay 2,300,000 won to the plaintiff and its related expenses on July 2016.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Basic facts 1) On May 25, 2016, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the Nam-gu Busan Metropolitan Government B apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) No. 510 (hereinafter “510”), and the Defendant is an autonomous management organization consisting of occupants of the instant apartment. 2) As the non-Dong rooftop floor area of the instant apartment is not flooded, the number of water leakages in 510,000, 510, 510, and 510,000, from the cost of KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 won for the instant apartment construction project.

(iii) [Ground of recognition] unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 3, each entry in Gap evidence 5 (including numbers, respectively), the purport of the whole pleadings;

B. Under the Housing Act and the Management Rules of Apartments, the Defendant is an autonomous organization composed of the occupants of the apartment of this case, and has the duty to manage the apartment of this case in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations, such as the Housing Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. According to the above facts, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff, the owner of the apartment of this case, for damages caused by the negligence in managing the non-Dong-dong rooftop of the apartment of this case, which is common areas, due to the negligence in which he neglected to manage the non-dong rooftop of the apartment of this case.

(a) Part of the rooftop waterproof construction cost - All 1,800,000 won;

B. In full view of the part on the construction cost of 510 heading 50,000 = 1,000,000 won x 50% x the above evidence and the whole purport of the pleadings, it is acknowledged that the plaintiff and the former owner did not immediately notify the defendant of the occurrence of leakage under 510 heading 510.

arrow