logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.02.15 2017가합539566
하자보수보증금 등 청구
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. shall be 67,866,584 won and the year from June 20, 2017 to February 15, 2019.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff is the Plaintiff’s 90 households, Busan-dong, Busan-dong, 90 (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

(2) Defendant B (D Co., Ltd.) is a project proprietor who constructed and sold the instant apartment, and a company which constructed construction works on the instant apartment.

3) The Defendant Union guaranteed the obligation to repair defects after the inspection on the use of the instant apartment in Defendant B’s instant apartment. (B) On June 12, 2012, Defendant B entered into a contract on the warranty of defects with the head of Busan District District Office as the guaranty creditor, which guarantees the obligation to repair defects after the inspection on the use of the instant apartment in Defendant B’s apartment (hereinafter “instant warranty contract”).

The warranty period of December 12, 2012: (a) from December 2016 to November 17, 2013; (b) from November 17, 2016 to 940, 2012 to December 2014; (c) from November 44, 202, 350 to December 31, 2014; and (d) from November 35, 361, 804 to November 36, 2015; and (e) the head of Busan Metropolitan City changed the warranty period of this case from December 26, 2016 to December 17, 2017 to June 16, 2016; and (e) the head of Busan Metropolitan Government changed the approval for the use of an apartment building of this case from December 21, 2016 to June 21, 2016 to June 21, 2016.

In the construction work of the apartment of this case, the defects, such as rupture and water leakage, have occurred, by not constructing the part to be constructed, or by modifying differently from the drawing of the defective construction or design, from the section for common use of the apartment of this case.

2 The plaintiff requested the repair of defects at the request of the tenant and the sectional owner of the apartment of this case, and the defendant B repaired some defects.

However, this case.

arrow