logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.02.21 2017가단232883
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s each of the Plaintiffs’ KRW 550,408 and each of the said amounts shall be 5% per annum from January 31, 2019 to February 21, 2019, and 5% per annum.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are the owners and occupants of the Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City D apartment and F apartment (hereinafter “Plaintiffs apartment”) in their respective shares of 1/2, and the Defendant is the owners and occupants of D apartment and E (hereinafter “Defendant apartment”).

B. On May 2017, around the Plaintiffs’ apartment toilets, the Plaintiffs discovered a phenomenon in which water leakage was generated from small-scale main walls adjacent to the Plaintiffs’ apartment toilets, and the distribution of which is changed from small-scale main walls.

(Attached 2 Map of Map 2) The location where water leakage has occurred in the upper right part, and hereinafter referred to as "the first hold of this case").

한편, 2017. 7.경부터 원고들 아파트 거실 확장 부분 샷시 상부 커텐박스 부위에서도 누수현상이 나타났다(별지 2 위치도 하단 누수발생위치, 이하 ‘이 사건 제2누수’라 한다). 라.

The instant No. 1 leakage occurred due to the deterioration of the Defendant’s toilet room, and the Defendant’s subsequent performance of the work on the Defendant’s toilet room after the implementation of the work on the Defendant’s apartment.

마. 이 사건 제2누수는 피고 아파트 발코니 난간턱 부위 콘크리트 균열, 샷시 창틀 주변 코킹 노후화 등으로 인하여 우수가 유입되는 데 그 원인이 있는 것으로 밝혀졌다.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry or image of Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including each number for a case with a serial number), the result of appraiser G’s appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim for damages

A. (i) The Plaintiffs need to repair the waterproof water of the Defendant’s apartment and the termination of the Plaintiffs’ apartment as to the number of the FirstNu water of this case. As such, the Defendant asserts that each of the Plaintiffs should pay KRW 249,025 (i.e., the finishing fee of KRW 498,049 ± 2). However, the aforementioned evidence alone is insufficient to acknowledge that additional leakage prevention work on the number of the FirstNu water of this case is necessary, and that different is recognized.

arrow