logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.05.14 2014가합41387
손해배상(기)
Text

1. For the defendant Shee Co., Ltd.:

A. 3,874,932 won to Plaintiff A, 3,874,332 won to Plaintiff B, and 3,825.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Party status No. 201 No. 202 No. 202, No. 302, No. 304, No. 501, No. 601, and No. 202, No. 501, and No. 601, Plaintiff A, B, C, D, E, and F had no non-party Nonparty GH non-party’s lessee.) Plaintiff A, B, C, D, and F had an I building A (hereinafter “instant building”).

Of the following table, the owners of each section for exclusive use are the owners of each section for exclusive use. Plaintiff H rents 302 from Plaintiff C around May 201, and Plaintiff H is the lessee leased 304 from Plaintiff D on March 4, 2009. Plaintiff E purchased Nos. 201,501 from J on August 1, 2013, and the J acquired the right to claim damages against Defendant Shee Construction and Defendant PP engineering. (2) Defendant Korea Trust is the owner of the instant construction and the owner of the instant construction work, and the owner of the instant construction work is the owner of the instant construction work, and the owner of the instant construction work is the owner of the instant construction and the owner of the instant construction work, who is the owner of the instant construction work, and the owner of the instant construction work, who is the owner of the instant construction and the owner of the instant construction work.

B. Defendant Shee Construction commenced around 2007 and ceased to perform the instant construction on January 20, 2012, which had occurred due to defects, such as the progress of the instant construction and rupture of the instant construction by Defendant Shee Construction. From June 2012 to June 4, 2013, the instant construction was re-exploited on January 20, 2012, and was re-exploited from June 201 to June 4, 2013.

As a result, the building in this case was invadedd by the site around May 2013, and due to this, the entrance door, each visit, and the bathing room door were distorted and the opening and closing of the building became inferior, and there was a physical phenomenon in water in the floor of the bathing room, and there was a crackt on the floor of the bathing room, and there was a defect in the underground parking lot floor such as subsidence, rupture, heating, parking lot columns and beams, the wall wall of the rooftop floor, the wall of the rooftop floor, and the wall of the wall are ruptured and the wall are ruptured.

C. This case’s building occurred.

arrow