logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.10.21 2018가합28979
하자보수에 갈음하는 손해배상 청구
Text

Defendant’s KRW 820,347,379 and KRW 814,611,694 among the Plaintiff’s KRW 820,347,37,685.

Reasons

Basic Facts

[Ground of Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6, Eul evidence 1 and 2, each entry or video (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

3) As a result, the appraiser C’s appraisal result (hereinafter “instant appraisal result”)

As a result of each supplementary appraisal, each fact-finding inquiry reply to the above appraiser of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings of this court] The plaintiff is an autonomous management organization composed of four and 430 residents of A apartment units D in Suwon-si, Suwon-si (hereinafter "the apartment of this case").

The defendant is a project undertaker who constructed and sold the apartment of this case, and the defendant's intervenor is a contractor who received a contract from the defendant to install the elevator among the new construction works of the apartment of this case.

The apartment building of this case was occupied from the time after obtaining approval for use on December 30, 2016. The construction works failed to construct the apartment building of this case and to construct the apartment building in accordance with the design drawing, or constructed the apartment building in a defective manner or by changing the construction differently from the design drawing, thereby causing defects such as rupture, water leakage, etc. to the section for common use and section for exclusive use of the apartment of this case. Accordingly, the apartment of this case caused trouble in functional, aesthetic, or safety.

The plaintiff continuously requested the defendant to repair the defects from the date of approval for use of the apartment of this case upon the request of the tenant or sectional owner of the apartment of this case, and in the case of some defects, the repair has been made.

However, in the section for common use and section for exclusive use of the apartment of this case, each defect in the sum calculation table of defect repairs by item of defect in common use, such as attached file 1, and the sum table of defect repairs by item of defect in exclusive ownership (hereinafter “instant defect”) remains.

After the sectional pre-use inspection, 23,304, 342 14,259, 229, 21, 458, 365 171, 56268, 338, 820, 293, 555, 762,0888, which was the 10-year section for common use for the 10-year section for the 5-year period between the 2-year 5th and 5-year 10 years following the previous pre-use inspection

arrow