beta
Text
1. The part against the plaintiff ordering payment under the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1-3 through 5, Gap evidence Nos. 8 and 9:
The Plaintiff is the owner of 401 m2, 344.20 m20 m2, 501 m29.70 m2, and the Defendant is the owner of 601 m20 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000.
B. The Plaintiff removed half of the instant building 401 and 501, and used all the two floors as a warehouse, and used the remainder as a separate office.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Since the defect in the construction and preservation of the instant building 601 owned by the Defendant as to the cause of the claim occurred due to the defect in the construction and preservation of the instant building 601, which was owned by the Plaintiff, from damage to the remote areas and computers, etc., the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damage pursuant to Article 758 of the Civil Act.
B. According to the evidence, Gap evidence, evidence Nos. 7, 11, and 16 through 20 (including paper numbers), the result of the appraisal of appraiser D by the trial appraiser D, and the fact-finding on appraiser D by the court of the trial of the trial of the trial of the trial of the party, which is owned by the defendant, there are several defects in water leakages of hot water pipes No. 601 of the building of this case, inflows of water leakages of water supply pipes of public toilets, water distribution pipes of heating distribution units, water leakages of heating distribution units, and one leakages of heating distribution units from July 2012 to May 2015, 2015, which are owned by the plaintiff until emergency measures of the trial of the party appraiser of this case were taken place.
According to the above facts, it can be sufficiently confirmed that damage has occurred to the Plaintiff’s owner due to defects in installation and preservation existing in the section for exclusive use under 601 of the building of this case, which is the Defendant’s ownership, due to damage to the Plaintiff’s owner under 501.