logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2013.08.28 2009가합11279
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 3,122,354,204 and KRW 500,000 among them, from September 3, 2009, KRW 2,622,354,204.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The defendant is a party in accordance with the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents. The defendant is a party in accordance with the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and the housing redevelopment project is implemented by the head of Gwanak-gu in accordance with the management and disposal plan for the housing redevelopment project as a project implementer for the housing redevelopment project in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which is conducted

A business entity that newly built and sold the instant apartment on August 28, 2006. The Defendant obtained approval for the use of the instant apartment on August 28, 2006. (2) The Plaintiff is an autonomous management organization consisting of representatives of occupants from the said 39 units for the management of the instant apartment.

3) The Intervenor joining the Defendant contracted the instant apartment construction from the Defendant for construction. B. The Defendant, when constructing the instant apartment, did not construct the part to be constructed in accordance with the design drawing in the construction of the instant apartment, or repaired several defects after the approval for use was modified differently from the defective construction or design drawing, and there remain defects such as the details of the defect and the amount of the repair fees up to the present time in the section for common use and section for exclusive use of the instant apartment. C. Of the 2,810 households of the instant apartment, the sectional owners of 2,615 households from August 27, 2009 to January 13, 2012, transferred each damage claim in lieu of the defect repair that the Defendant had against the Defendant, and delegated the Plaintiff with the right to notify the transfer of the claim thereafter. The Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim at that time.

2) The ratio of the above part of the household that transferred the damage claim in lieu of defect repair to the Plaintiff to the total sum of 234,236.56m2 of the total area of the total area of the exclusive ownership of the apartment of this case 2,810 units to the Plaintiff is 93.32% (the same shall apply hereinafter).

Article 6 of the Addenda to the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (amended by Act No. 7502 of May 26, 2005) (the relation with the Housing Act).

arrow