beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 17,948,82 and the interest rate of KRW 12% per annum from August 30, 2018 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On April 20, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant on the purchase price of KRW 550 million for the land and buildings listed in the separate sheet (attached Form No. 2) (hereinafter “instant building”) as indicated in the separate sheet.
(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). B.
At the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the agreement entered into by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, stating that “the buyer is a sales contract under the direct checking of the present facilities as the land,” and that “the seller shall accept (the seller’s liability for warranty) within six months from the date of occurrence of leakage after the vehicle.”
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff could enjoy water from the instant building at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, but it is short that the Defendant did not enjoy water, as stated in the special agreement, so the Defendant agreed to repair the water if water leakage occurs, and the Defendant agreed to repair the water if water leakage occurs, and the rainwater, which newly leaked through the roof, flows into the ceiling and the wall on the side of the third floor of the instant building after hanging on the rooftop floor, is occurring, and thus, the amount equivalent to the repair cost for the prevention of water leakage is claimed against the Defendant.
B. The summary of the defendant's assertion 1) The blade roof installed on the rooftop of the building of this case is to be additionally aground after the construction of the building. The building of this case was newly constructed in the form of slab, and the original roof was not stated in the building ledger or the copy of the register, but the defendant proposed to remove the above roof part of the building to the plaintiff at the time of the sale contract, but the plaintiff proposed to remove the above roof part.