logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2013.12.04 2012가합201096
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 315,215,116 among the Plaintiff, and KRW 101,00,000 among the Plaintiff, from July 13, 2012, and KRW 214,215,116.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the party is 1) The Korea National Housing Corporation (the Korea Land Corporation on October 1, 2009) (the defendant was merged with the Korea Land Corporation and became the defendant.

In the lower court, “Defendant” is not classified before and after the merger.

[Attachment-si, Seocheon-gu, Gyeonggi-do, 717 Orun Park Jong-dong, 612 households (hereinafter referred to as the “instant apartment”).

A business entity that newly built and sold the instant apartment on October 17, 2006. The Defendant obtained approval for the use of the instant apartment on October 17, 2006. 2) The Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor Company is a business entity that constructed the instant apartment upon being awarded a contract with the Defendant for the construction of the instant apartment. The Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor

3) For the management of the instant apartment, the Plaintiff is an autonomous management body consisting of the representatives of the occupants from the said nine buildings. (b) Although the Defendant, when constructing the instant apartment, failed to construct the part to be constructed in accordance with the design drawings, or repaired several defects by altering the construction differently from the defective construction or design drawings, there exists any defect as described in the attached Tables 1 and 2 up to now in the section for exclusive use and common use of the instant apartment. (c) Of the 612 households of the instant apartment, some of the sectional owners of the instant apartment units transfer their right to notify the Plaintiff of the assignment of the claim for damages in lieu of the defect repair that the Defendant had against, and delegated the Plaintiff with the right to notify the assignment of the assignment of the claim. The Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the assignment of each of the above assignment of claims around July 11, 2012, around January 10, 2013, around March 20, 2013, and each of the notification was issued to the Defendant.

2) The ratio of part of the above household that transferred the damage claim in lieu of defect repair to the Plaintiff is 93.9039% of the total amount of the entire exclusive ownership area of the instant apartment.

arrow