logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.06.02 2014가합107339
하자보수보증금 등 청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant treatment industry development corporation is dismissed.

2. The defendant Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff is a new Jinan apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) located in 197-8 (Refratal Campaign) Sinjin-si, Jinjin-si, Jinan apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

(2) In order to manage five households, 360 households, and ancillary facilities, it is an autonomous management body consisting of their occupants. 2) Grand Spanish Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Spanish”) is a corporation that is the project undertaker of the sale of the apartment of this case, and the Daewoo Automobile Sales Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Treatment Automobile Sales”) is a corporation that constructed the apartment of this case by being awarded a contract for the construction of the apartment of this case from Grand Spanish.

The Defendant Guarantee Corporation (the name of the Korea Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation was changed from the Korea Housing and Urban Fund pursuant to Article 4 of the Addenda to the Housing and Urban Fund Act to the Korea Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation) is a corporation that has entered into a warranty contract for the instant apartment with the sale of Daewoo Automobile

3) Rehabilitation procedures were commenced on August 10, 201, and the Seoul Central District Court approved the rehabilitation plan on December 9, 201, which was established by the Defendant Company on December 19, 201, following the aforementioned rehabilitation plan. B. The conclusion of the contract for the repair of defects and the approval for use thereof (i.e., the conclusion of the contract for the repair of defects) on March 25, 2010 between the Defendant Guarantee Corporation and the guarantee company and the guarantee company as the guarantee creditor, respectively, entered into each contract for the repair of defects (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “each guarantee contract of this case”), and the Defendant Guarantee Corporation issued each guarantee bond under each of the respective guarantee contracts of this case, as indicated below (hereinafter referred to as the “each guarantee contract of this case”).

[Attachment 1] The Guarantee No. 1 0122220-201-0020201- 312,452,737 March 31, 2010 to March 30, 2011 (1 year) 2, No. 312,452,737, March 31, 2010 to March 31, 2010 to 312,452,737 from March 31, 2010 to March 30, 2012 (2 years) 3, 012220-201 to 201-203,00203,679, 679, 105 to 31 March 31, 2013.

arrow