logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.01.27 2012가합20096
하자보수보증금등
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendant U.S. Industrial Development and the Japanese Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. are 2,308,009,442 won and each of them.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an autonomous management organization that consists of occupants for the management of the A Apartment 15-dong 1316 (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

Defendant U.S. Industrial Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant U.S. Industry Development”) and Japan Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant U.S. Comprehensive Construction”) are project undertakers who jointly constructed and sold the apartment of this case, and the Defendant Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd.”) concluded a warranty contract for the apartment of this case as follows.

B. On September 24, 2008, the warranty period of B 1 B 1,460,927,664, Sep. 24, 2008: (a) on September 23, 2009: (b) D 2,191,391,491, 496 September 24, 2008; (c) the project undertaker bears the responsibility for the warranty against the Defendant’s warranty against the warranty period of 1 B 1,460,927,664; and (d) on September 23, 2011, where the warranty period of the instant case was entered into with the Defendant’s warranty contract of 1,095,695,748; and (e) on September 24, 2013, the project undertaker of the instant case and the Defendant’s warranty against the Defendant’s house of 1,05,697.84.208.

When the Defendant project proprietor newly constructed the instant apartment, the alteration was made to the section for exclusive use and the section for common use of the instant apartment, thereby causing a defect such as rupture, water leakage, etc. (hereinafter “each of the instant defects”) and resulting in an obstacle to the function, aesthetic, or safety of the instant apartment.

The plaintiff is excluded from 71 households indicated in the attached Form 1,245 household units among the 1,316 apartment units of this case, hereinafter referred to as "non-transfer representative of claim."

arrow