logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.28 2017가합561648
하자보수비 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's defendant corporation's taking over the suit of filial duty as well as the defendant construction mutual aid association.

Reasons

(b)the cause and time of the examination for planting landscaping trees cannot be identified, and thus, it cannot be viewed as a construction defect.

[ without a reason] An appraiser verified the parts that were dead and modified, the shortage of landscaping trees, and calculated the expenses for repairing defects in comparison with design drawings and construction site construction, and then calculated the expenses for repairing defects. As long as landscaping trees are not defective construction that may cause hindrance to growth and growth, it is general that the expenses for repairing defects do not proceed with the examination. In light of the fact that accurate cause and time of occurrence of the examination is virtually difficult, the appraisal result of this case, which calculated the cost of repairing defects by deeming it as defects in construction, shall not be deemed considerably unreasonable.

However, in the case of a tree test, the circumstances, etc. where it is impracticable to distinguish the parts due to a mistake in construction and a mistake in the use and management shall be considered in the limitation of liability for the total amount

[Public 89] Part (Design:3SET/Construction: 20,000) of the 1st floor co-construction cell board (Design: 3SET/Construction: 2SET) such as solar safety of the 1st floor above ground, the Defendants, who were not construction, shall not be deemed construction defects.

[ without any reason] An appraiser evaluated the defects in the construction that the security light of the facility specification, such as outdoor power and security light, is marked at three points, and the security light of the facility specification, such as outdoor power and security light, has been constructed. According to the evidence Eul evidence No. 8, it is found that the solar security light on the facility specification of the approval drawings E-103 outdoor power and security light is written only two points, which is different from the sight chart, but the above sight chart is applied more preferentially than the floor plan in that it is the detailed level of the facility part, and thus, it is not unreasonable to assess the error as a defect in the construction in accordance with the sight chart.

[Public 96] Since the construction of a stoppy valve changed around each floor's corridor measuring instrument, this part is not a defect in construction.

arrow